2008 Woodie Awards
Patent law reforms require careful consideration
David Petters
Issue date: 11/16/07 Section: OpEd Page
Amidst all of the conflict at home and abroad, a politically complex and seemingly innocuous issue like patent law reform doesn't always make headlines. But over the past few weeks a political movement has been gaining momentum that threatens the fount of innovation within the United States.
There is little disagreement among experts that the United States patent system is the strongest of any nation in the world. The United States economy, at every stage, is and always has been built upon a framework that strongly protects innovation. Thomas Jefferson himself penned the original definition of what is patentable; a definition that today still lives in the statutes.
Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) has proposed a bill that, among other things, will change the criterion for determining the primacy of two similar patent applications. The United States traditionally has awarded a patent based on the person who was the "first-to-invent." This differs from much of the other developed nations who base the decision on "first-to-file."
Leahy has proposed that the United States shift to a system of first-to-file because it simplifies the patent process and would help reduce court costs. The first-to-invent system often results in complicated litigation when two parties claim and attempt to prove first discovery.
Opponents to Senator Leahy's plan point out that the system will give a decisive advantage to large corporations who can afford to pay for quick filings. Small companies and workshop-in-the-garage inventors could never compete in a race with the much deeper pockets (and legal staff on retainer) of companies like Microsoft. There is also the risk that first-to-file would contribute to a further decline in the quality of patents issued. Hastily prepared applications pushed through the already log-jammed U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) become landmines, biding their time until an overworked examiner issues a patent overlapping another invention.
There is little disagreement among experts that the United States patent system is the strongest of any nation in the world. The United States economy, at every stage, is and always has been built upon a framework that strongly protects innovation. Thomas Jefferson himself penned the original definition of what is patentable; a definition that today still lives in the statutes.
Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) has proposed a bill that, among other things, will change the criterion for determining the primacy of two similar patent applications. The United States traditionally has awarded a patent based on the person who was the "first-to-invent." This differs from much of the other developed nations who base the decision on "first-to-file."
Leahy has proposed that the United States shift to a system of first-to-file because it simplifies the patent process and would help reduce court costs. The first-to-invent system often results in complicated litigation when two parties claim and attempt to prove first discovery.
Opponents to Senator Leahy's plan point out that the system will give a decisive advantage to large corporations who can afford to pay for quick filings. Small companies and workshop-in-the-garage inventors could never compete in a race with the much deeper pockets (and legal staff on retainer) of companies like Microsoft. There is also the risk that first-to-file would contribute to a further decline in the quality of patents issued. Hastily prepared applications pushed through the already log-jammed U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) become landmines, biding their time until an overworked examiner issues a patent overlapping another invention.
Viewing Comments 1 - 1 of 1
Andrew
posted 11/17/07 @ 3:02 PM EST
would it be about anything else?
Post a Comment