Where's the discussion of fee diversion?
With talk about H.R. 2795 renewed, where is the discussion of fee diversion in patent reform? From JPTOS in 2001:
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) has been fully
funded by user fees for over ten years. Actually, it has been more than fully
funded, as more than a half billion dollars in user fees have been diverted for
other purposes. n2 In recent years the diversion represents approximately
ten percent of all the user fees paid to the PTO. While this problem has been
widely reported, n3 its solution continues to evade the reach of those it
hurts most, intellectual property owners.
Heath W. Hoglund, 83 J. Pat. & Trademark Off. Soc'y 725 (Oct. 2001)
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) has been fully
funded by user fees for over ten years. Actually, it has been more than fully
funded, as more than a half billion dollars in user fees have been diverted for
other purposes. n2 In recent years the diversion represents approximately
ten percent of all the user fees paid to the PTO. While this problem has been
widely reported, n3 its solution continues to evade the reach of those it
hurts most, intellectual property owners.
Heath W. Hoglund, 83 J. Pat. & Trademark Off. Soc'y 725 (Oct. 2001)
posted by Lawrence B. Ebert at 5:15 AM
1 Comments:
The relevance of that discussion was in turn discussed at
http://just-n-examiner.livejournal.com/.
I'm more interested to see if Lamar Smith and the patent reformers will tackle the issue.
Post a Comment
<< Home