Is patent reform going forward, or not?
In contrast to a breezy prediction from HP's Mike Holston (we're 95% of the way there on patent reform), ITWorld (Grant Gross) gave a different view on patent reform which included the text:
The House in September passed a patent reform bill -- supported by many large tech vendors, but opposed by several small tech companies -- but similar legislation has been stalled in the Senate. Large tech vendors, including Microsoft, IBM and Symantec, have called for patent reform, saying it's too easy for companies with no intention of creating products to buy up patents and file multimillion-dollar infringement lawsuits against other companies.
On Jan. 22, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Nevada Democrat, said patent reform was a priority, but it was in a line behind several other bills, including an economic stimulus package and a government surveillance authorization bill. The Senate would turn to patent reform, "time permitting," he said then.
"On patent reform, we must carefully strike the right balance with a bill that promotes rather than blocks innovation from enterprising entrepreneurs," Reid added.
Of post-grant review (PGR, aka opposition), ITWorld noted:
That provision would "create more problems than it solves," said the Commerce Department letter, signed by Nathaniel Wienecke, the agency's assistant secretary for legislative and intergovernmental affairs. "The administration believes that such a dramatic change from current jurisprudence may have the unintended consequence of reducing the rewards of innovation and encouraging patent infringement," Wienecke wrote.
IPBiz adds that adding a step of "product inspection" to solve an alleged problem of "product quality" is not an approach consistent with the teachings of Deming. PGR, in creating a review MORE EXPENSIVE than re-examination, would become a tool to victimize smaller patent holders.
Also, one notes on Feb. 7, CNET reported:
The Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation [WARF] sued Intel on Wednesday [Feb. 6] for patent infringement, charging that the Core 2 Duo infringes on a patent granted to University of Wisconsin at Madison researchers in 1998 [US 5,781,752] for a processor design that can break instructions into separate strands for more efficient processing. Is this the type of suit the IT people think of when saying: Large tech vendors, including Microsoft, IBM and Symantec, have called for patent reform, saying it's too easy for companies with no intention of creating products to buy up patents and file multimillion-dollar infringement lawsuits against other companies.
The House in September passed a patent reform bill -- supported by many large tech vendors, but opposed by several small tech companies -- but similar legislation has been stalled in the Senate. Large tech vendors, including Microsoft, IBM and Symantec, have called for patent reform, saying it's too easy for companies with no intention of creating products to buy up patents and file multimillion-dollar infringement lawsuits against other companies.
On Jan. 22, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Nevada Democrat, said patent reform was a priority, but it was in a line behind several other bills, including an economic stimulus package and a government surveillance authorization bill. The Senate would turn to patent reform, "time permitting," he said then.
"On patent reform, we must carefully strike the right balance with a bill that promotes rather than blocks innovation from enterprising entrepreneurs," Reid added.
Of post-grant review (PGR, aka opposition), ITWorld noted:
That provision would "create more problems than it solves," said the Commerce Department letter, signed by Nathaniel Wienecke, the agency's assistant secretary for legislative and intergovernmental affairs. "The administration believes that such a dramatic change from current jurisprudence may have the unintended consequence of reducing the rewards of innovation and encouraging patent infringement," Wienecke wrote.
IPBiz adds that adding a step of "product inspection" to solve an alleged problem of "product quality" is not an approach consistent with the teachings of Deming. PGR, in creating a review MORE EXPENSIVE than re-examination, would become a tool to victimize smaller patent holders.
Also, one notes on Feb. 7, CNET reported:
The Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation [WARF] sued Intel on Wednesday [Feb. 6] for patent infringement, charging that the Core 2 Duo infringes on a patent granted to University of Wisconsin at Madison researchers in 1998 [US 5,781,752] for a processor design that can break instructions into separate strands for more efficient processing. Is this the type of suit the IT people think of when saying: Large tech vendors, including Microsoft, IBM and Symantec, have called for patent reform, saying it's too easy for companies with no intention of creating products to buy up patents and file multimillion-dollar infringement lawsuits against other companies.
posted by Lawrence B. Ebert at 3:26 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home