Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Posted at 5:10 PM ET, 03/ 1/2011

Senate debates patent reform as more voices weigh in

By Hayley Tsukayama

The Senate continued debate Tuesday on The America Invents Act, a patent reform act introduced by Judiciary chairman Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.). The bill, which proposes an overhaul to the way the patent system works, would change to a first inventor to file system rather than its current first-to-invent system.

Much of the rest of the world already uses this first-to-file system, intended to create a clear timeline for an invention. The bill does allow for exceptions to this rule, making allowances, for example, for academics who share their ideas with colleagues.

The bill has bipartisan support and the backing of the White House, which issued a statement saying, "This essential provision will reduce legal costs, improve fairness, and support U.S. innovators seeking to market their products and services in a global marketplace." It also has the support of The Coalition for 21st Century Patent Reform, which include companies such as 3M, General Electric, DuPont, Motorola, Proctor and Gamble, and Johnson and Johnson.

Leahy and Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) introduced an amendment to the bill this morning that made several small changes. It halves the application and search fees for small entities requesting accelerated patent examination and creates three, smaller satellite patent offices.

The proposal has met with resistance from some of its earliest supporters in the technology industry. The Coalition for Patent Fairness, which includes companies such as Adobe, Apple, Google, Intel and Verizon, has issued a statement saying it opposes the current bill.

"The goal of the Coalition for Patent Fairness is to develop a balanced, effective, and strong patent system for the 21st century," the coalition said in a press release. "The provisions outlined in S. 23, scheduled to be debated by the Senate, do not yet meet this goal."

"Portions of the current bill – including the inter partes reexam, damages, and venue sections – remain objectionable to the technology community and we believe most stakeholders would support removing those sections," the release stated. The coalition also has concerns about including prior user rights in the first to file system and ensuring funding for the Patent and Trademark Office.

Related Stories:


Congress takes up major change in patent law

Why the patent process should be overhauled

The Circuit: Patent reform, voting to disapprove net neutrality, Google explains e-mail scare

By Hayley Tsukayama  | March 1, 2011; 5:10 PM ET
Categories:  Apple, Google, Intel, Mobile  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Christopher Dodd to lead the Motion Picture Association of America
Next: The Circuit: Net neutrality vote delayed, Supreme Court rules in FOIA case, Apple to launch iPad 2

Comments

"The goal of the Coalition for Patent Fairness is to develop a balanced, effective, and strong patent system for the 21st century"

That is untrue. Rather their goal is to make the patent system too expensive and unworkable for their small entity and startup competitors. That is what the proposed bill will do. According to recent studies by the Kauffman Foundation and economists at the U.S. Census Bureau, “startups aren’t everything when it comes to job growth. They’re the only thing.” This bill is a wholesale slaughter of US jobs.

Please see http://truereform.piausa.org/ for a different/opposing view on patent reform.

Posted by: 0028 | March 2, 2011 9:11 AM | Report abuse

Although many independent inventors and others have expressed displeasure with the current patent reform bill, the inclusion of provisions ending fee diversion and creating fee-setting authority for the USPTO are pretty persuasive.
http://www.aminn.org/patent-reform-act-2011-s23

Posted by: Gena777 | March 7, 2011 7:56 PM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company