What is the "conservative" position on patent reform?
IPBiz got an email:
Professor Viet Dinh, one of the pre-eminent conservative legal scholars in the country, today released a paper touting the need for patent reform. “Patent Reform: Protecting Property Rights and the Marketplace of Ideas” examines how the present patent system, which invites abuse through litigation, does damage to our economy and deters innovation.
The paper goes on to explain how the Patent Reform Act, currently before the Senate, would go a long way to restoring balance to the current system. The bill was passed by the House last September and is scheduled for action on the Senate floor in the beginning of January.
IPBiz wonders what the truly "conservative" position on patent reform is. Being against "lots of litigation" sounds conservative/Republican. HOWEVER, proposing a post-grant review/opposition procedure, which promotes MORE legal activity, does not sound conservative/Republican. Further, a conservative approach would be to "get the job done right in the first place," which would argue for more resources for examination, not the installation of a product inspection step (post-grant review). Deming, the guru of quality, would reject the post-grant review proposal in a heartbeat.
Thus, to Daniel P. Sweet and Viet Dinh, a request to show your true colors.
Professor Viet Dinh, one of the pre-eminent conservative legal scholars in the country, today released a paper touting the need for patent reform. “Patent Reform: Protecting Property Rights and the Marketplace of Ideas” examines how the present patent system, which invites abuse through litigation, does damage to our economy and deters innovation.
The paper goes on to explain how the Patent Reform Act, currently before the Senate, would go a long way to restoring balance to the current system. The bill was passed by the House last September and is scheduled for action on the Senate floor in the beginning of January.
IPBiz wonders what the truly "conservative" position on patent reform is. Being against "lots of litigation" sounds conservative/Republican. HOWEVER, proposing a post-grant review/opposition procedure, which promotes MORE legal activity, does not sound conservative/Republican. Further, a conservative approach would be to "get the job done right in the first place," which would argue for more resources for examination, not the installation of a product inspection step (post-grant review). Deming, the guru of quality, would reject the post-grant review proposal in a heartbeat.
Thus, to Daniel P. Sweet and Viet Dinh, a request to show your true colors.
posted by Lawrence B. Ebert at 7:55 AM
1 Comments:
Conservative approach? Make patent law as close to what it was in, say, 1985.
Post a Comment
<< Home