Updating the U.S. Patent Office
http://thekojonnamdishow.org/shows/2011-06-29/updating-us-patent-office
The U.S. Patent Office has a backlog of more than 1.25 million applications. By some estimates, simply clearing those requests could create more than two million American jobs. We talk with USPTO Director David Kappos about the challenges facing his agency and the future of innovation and patents.
Guests
David Kappos
Director, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
Start ups are vital to US Innovation and this bill would be devastating to a system which worked so well for over 200 years in making the US the most prolific innovator in the world. There are several problems with this legislation that will resulting in QUASHING innovation not encouraging it.
First of all and most outrageous is that the bill is riddled with political favors including special favors for banks to avoid having to pay for technology they are currently using and another special provision that is a favor toward MDCO to help change the outcome of litigation currently underway.
Additionally, as it affects those of us who invest:
1. Expansion of Post Grant Review. Currently the PTO already allows a majority of re-exam requests. Thus, early/premature disclosure on the front end, jeopardizes litigation on the back end. To add additional ways for large or multinational corporations to contest issued patents of inventors and small entities heavily disfavors start-ups. First, companies have to fight the PTO to issue the patents, then they will have to fight a never-ending stream of administrative actions and challenges.
2. Elimination of the Grace Period. Currently, the patent grace period allows inventors to freely publish or sell their creation for up to 12 months after inventing without losing their patent rights. Since it is impossible to file an application that describes a workable invention before the public use or sale which tests and validates it as an inventive solution, the loss of grace period in which to perfect a patent means that there will be only lesser quality patents filed. This translates into a greater backlog and a greater wait to have patents granted. The longer it takes to get a patent granted, the greater is my risk in investing. While the bill notes that the grace period remains at one year, the combined provisions in other parts of the bill make it moot. Additionally, HR. 1249 doesn’t actually "harmonize" with the rest of the world. It simply creates its own hybrid, which will force patents to be directly registered overseas since current language indicates that public use anywhere forfeits rights abroad. How many start-ups can go straight from idea to global patent prosecution? The cost is prohibitive.
3. First to File. When a start up must put more money into immediately filing multiple patents instead of working on innovation, they are simply using my investment dollars to produce paperwork rather than innovating. I would prefer that my investment dollars go to building a company that uses its resources on innovation, inventory, sales and employees rather than on expensive paperwork. While patents are a nice anchor through which to create value in a company, the real value is what the company does with the patent. Company operations and their ability to generate revenue with the product are most essential. Thus, early/premature disclosure benefits noone. And, spending money on unnecessary patent prosecution costs means there is less time and money for building the company. If there is no company, there is no value, and thus no jobs. H.R. 1249 actually inhibits the growth of businesses and jobs since it will increase the length of time and money that it takes to build a company around the paperwork.
Small entities have been given far too little voice on this bill when one considers that they rely much more heavily on the patent system than do large firms who can control their markets by size alone.
A sad day for American innovation. We already lament the days when we used to MAKE things in the US. We will soon lament the days when we used to INVENT things here.
Valerie Gaydos
ANGEL VENTURE FORUM
http://www.angelventureforum.com
Twitter @angelventures
The introduction states that clearing the backlog at the Patent office will spur business growth. I agree that reducing the backlog will help. But where in HR 1249 will the patent backlog be reduced? If anything it will be increased.
1. When the system changes from first to invent to first to file,USPTO will be inundated with more patent applications. And, because it creates a rush to the patent office they will be more poorly written. Thus, more applications, more backlog and lower quality.
2. Additionally, by reducing the amount of money the patent office gets to keep, they will then have less money to do more work.
3. With the increase in the number of poorly written and rushed patents, this will simply increase litigation. (then when you add the post grant review changes which change 220 years of case law, it will be nothing but the wild west again forcing companies to spend more and more money to ensure they are protected. And even then, it gives multinational corps expanded opportunities to put little companies out of business and thus enabling the big companies to buy their technology at firesale prices.)
So what exactly does HR 1249 do? It certainly will do nothing to decrease the backlog.
I am a highly trained engineer with great work experience who is interested in a job with a patent office, but when you go to the website, it states that you aren't currently hiring. When do you expect to hire again?
It is fine that we honor patents and trademarks issued by other governments. But what enforcement mechanisms exist to ensure that US-registered patents and trademarks are respected abroad? In some countries -- Guatemala is one example -- there is a veritable industry based on the registration of well-known international trademarks which compels legitimate trademark holders to 'negotiate' the right to use their own intellectual property in those markets. Who enforces our rights?
What is the difference between a trademark and a service mark? And is there a distinction between a trademark and a registered trademark?
Thanks for the answer.
Your guest [Mr Kappos?] said two things, both seemingly positive, but which imply a potentially serious problem:
1. China's emergence as a patenting authority is a good thing because the Chinese will start honoring others' patents as a result.
2. Our software patenting policy will be highly conservative.
The apparent problem here is that China's software patenting policy probably won't be conservative all.
How does your guest expect that issue to play out?
The backlog is 700,000 and NOT 1.25 million. Who came up with that number?
Wow i think everyone are not aware of this fact, why are the officials not doing something about it , there would be more jobs for people who are jobless. dover delaware