Group of >200 writes Leahy about needed changes in S.1145

A group of over 200 organizations wrote Senator Leahy (and others) about patent reform on June 19, 2007, urging

- Removal of language in the proposed legislation (S.1145/H.R. 1908) pertaining to the apportionment of damages;

- Removal of the open-ended post-grant review process;

- Removal of rulemaking authority for the Patent and Trademark Office; and

- The inclusion of a more flexible grace period to allow patentees to adjust to changes in patent laws and rules.

The state of New Jersey was represented in the group of 200, with signers including
Celgene (Summit, NJ), Biotechnology Council of New Jersey, HealthCare Institute of New Jersey (Bridgewater, NJ), and NovoNordisk (Princeton, NJ). Also, Qualcomm was a signer, as were WARF, Cornell University, Monsanto, and Novartis.

****
The Medical Device Manufacturers Association (MDMA) had a press release which stated:

The Medical Devices Manufacturers Association (MDMA) joined over 200 other organizations to express concerns with The Patent Reform Act of 2007, S.1145 and H.R. 1908.

In a letter sent to key members of the House and Senate Judiciary Committees, a diverse set of stakeholders stated that the Patent Reform Act would "hinder innovation across the diverse sectors of the American economy we represent, including academia, agriculture, alternative energy, biotechnology, chemical, electronics, environmental technology, financial services, information technology, life sciences, nanotechnology, and telecommunications."

MDMA's Executive Director, Mark Leahey, stated, "the current bill would severely undermine investment and innovation in every industry, including medical technology." Leahey continued, "the diverse nature of signatories demonstrates the far reaching implications this legislation will have on the patent system and we urge Congress to make the recommended changes to ensure America's innovation economy continues to flourish."

To read the letter, please visit the following link: http://www.medicaldevices.org/public/documents/PatentReformLetterFinal06.19.07_000.pdf

****
Separately, Ann Therese Palmer (in money.cnn) has an article titled Will Congress slam small inventors? A massive patent reform would be tough on entrepreneurs in which she writes:

With shrinking penalties, there is less incentive to agree to licensing patents and more temptation to cheat. "In effect, the new [proposed patent] rules would lower costs for big companies like Microsoft and Intel and reduce their risk of being socked with major judgments," says Poltorak.

That's no accident. The bill is largely the work of the Coalition for Patent Fairness, a group backed by Microsoft, Intel, Dell, and other high-tech and Wall Street companies and represented by lobbying powerhouse Patton Boggs. The Microsoft group is opposed by another big-business lobby, the Coalition for 21st Century Patent Reform, representing pharmaceutical companies, multinationals such as GE, and some tech companies such as Motorola. Both groups favor first to file but agree on little else. Producing hardware and software that rely on hundreds of patents, Microsoft and its allies are highly exposed to patent suits and spent years lobbying for limits. They got nowhere under Republican leadership, which sided with Big Pharma-companies whose livelihood can depend on a single patent and are leery of losing any protection. In the Democratic Congress, the legislation has won bipartisan support in both houses. (The Commerce Department, which oversees the PTO, has asked the sponsors to reconsider the bill's limits on damage awards and has raised questions about the extended review period, among other concerns.)

Where are the leading small-business lobbies? The National Federation of Independent Business is taking no stand, because its data indicate that only 4.7% of small-business owners have patents. The board of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce split over the proposed legislation, leaving it "aggressively neutral," says Chris Merida, public affairs and congressional director. The closest small business has come to being heard was at a March hearing of the House Small Business Subcommittee, which has no role in crafting the legislation. Neis (John Neis, managing director of Venture Investors) and Lord (Bryan Lord, general counsel of AmberWave Systems Corp.) testified against the bill, but the event drew little attention, spurring Lord to launch his own lobby, Innovation Alliance, which has 100 members and has urged lawmakers to approach patent reform more cautiously.