Foreman backs patent reform
From a piece by Louis Foreman, of Inventors Digest:
Our current system of protecting inventors is in dire need of reform. The proposed measures would be a significant improvement to the existing system and benefit everyone. The reform legislation will lower fees for micro-entities, provide for a shorter waiting time for patent prosecution, and ultimately result in a stronger patent making it easier for independent inventors and small businesses to attract start-up capital.
Change can be frightening, and I can certainly understand why there would be reluctance to address the system. What I’m concerned about, however, is when groups opposed to advancing the system use fear to thwart progress and prevent the benefits associated with change. Sitting still and leaving the current system alone is not an option, nor does it benefit anyone. Pendency must be reduced to allow for an efficient system of protecting intellectual property and stimulating innovation.
While I support the proposed patent reform measures, I am hopeful that change does not end here. This is the time and opportunity to invest in the innovative future of America by providing increased funding to the USPTO to reduce the current backlog by modernizing the systems and technologies used to process applications.
Of the text benefit everyone, one wonders why there is so much opposition, especially among smaller inventors, who Foreman claims to represent. The opposition procedure (aka post-grant review) will be used primarily AGAINST smaller inventors.
A significant problem with funding for the USPTO is fee diversion, and S.515 does not address fee diversion. If fee diversion is not addressed, the other "remedies" are meaningless.
Our current system of protecting inventors is in dire need of reform. The proposed measures would be a significant improvement to the existing system and benefit everyone. The reform legislation will lower fees for micro-entities, provide for a shorter waiting time for patent prosecution, and ultimately result in a stronger patent making it easier for independent inventors and small businesses to attract start-up capital.
Change can be frightening, and I can certainly understand why there would be reluctance to address the system. What I’m concerned about, however, is when groups opposed to advancing the system use fear to thwart progress and prevent the benefits associated with change. Sitting still and leaving the current system alone is not an option, nor does it benefit anyone. Pendency must be reduced to allow for an efficient system of protecting intellectual property and stimulating innovation.
While I support the proposed patent reform measures, I am hopeful that change does not end here. This is the time and opportunity to invest in the innovative future of America by providing increased funding to the USPTO to reduce the current backlog by modernizing the systems and technologies used to process applications.
Of the text benefit everyone, one wonders why there is so much opposition, especially among smaller inventors, who Foreman claims to represent. The opposition procedure (aka post-grant review) will be used primarily AGAINST smaller inventors.
A significant problem with funding for the USPTO is fee diversion, and S.515 does not address fee diversion. If fee diversion is not addressed, the other "remedies" are meaningless.
posted by Lawrence B. Ebert at 9:53 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home