Slashdot Mirror
Talk To a European Patent Examiner
While the US Patent and Trade Office sparks more discussion on Slashdot, the European Patent Office and the patent examiners who work there do much the same job as their US counterparts, although they work under a different set of laws and regulations. John Savage is a European patent examiner, and he has kindly consented to answer questions from Slashdot readers about the EU patent process. Usual rules apply: One question per post, we send 10 of the highest-moderated questions to John about 24 hours after this post appears, and run his answers verbatim when we get them back.
exactly what IS your opinion on such ridiculous patent claims as the BT claim on hyperlinks? What actions do you think should be taken when something as dumb as this comes around?
Looking for Book Reviews? Check out Literary Escapism.
What is being done to stop the abuses of the patent system we see in the US ? (I'm particularly thinking of the recent so-called "JPEG" fiasco).
Or perhaps you do not view them as unreasonable, but I myself see this kind of patenting of existing things plus litigating against large corporations as an ethically bankrupt "revenue stream".
graspee
Are European patent examiners graded on the same "points" system as their American counterparts? I believe the points system goes something like "Approval : 1 point, Early Approval : 2 points, Rejection : 0 points plus possible appeal".
Who grades your performance, and how?
Doubtless you are aware of the broad problems and miadventures of the USPTO. In your opinion, what are the USPTO doing wrong?
Cretin - a powerful and flexible CD reencoder
How often do you get applications for simple stuff that clearly has been done by others or are non-innovative, such as using images in an online business, or one-click shopping? If the rate is high, do you suspect that frivolous patents in the US are to blame? If the rate is low, do you attribute this to the overall examination of each application?
The One Rule Of Chess You'll Ever Need: Don't play someone who carries a kit in their bookbag.
With the recent scuffle over JPEG licensing, the issue has come up about patents that were not actively enforced until they became industry standards. If I create a new widget design, let it be copied until all homes on the continent have my widget, then decide to enforce my patent and take the 300,000 or so manufacturers to court, do I have a right to enforce my patent or does it get dismissed?
There is no reasonable defense against an idiot with an agenda
:wq
What resources do you use looking for prior art and how exhaustive is it? How does the prior art help you determine obviousness?
I am not a number! I am a man! And don't you
I have always thought that the solution to alot of the patent problems we are seeing lies in the details. Alot of Patents that get granted seem very open ended. "A process for doing X with Y", but they many times seem to lack detail and are very openended in how they can be viewed. It seems to me that the public would be better served
if Patents were granted on ver specific fine grained processes. "Specific Process for doing X with Y by using Z in combination with A, B, C, to achive K..." Would you agree? Why or why not?
Power Corrupts,Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely, leaving one person(group)in charge is absolutely corrupt.
Do you feel pressure from the US and other countries to approve software patents? I know many corporations will withhold business from countries that don't have "support" for this sort of thing, so is there a big national-level economic incentive in software patents?
One of the major shortcomings of the USPTO seems to be that there are far too many patent applications for the number of people processing them; thus patents on stupid things, obvious things, and even long time standard industry practice things slip through frequently.
Do you believe that your organization has enough employees to adequately review all patent applications? This includes all of the tasks that you're presumably charged with: examining the patent's relevance to its field, searching for prior art, etc. We don't hear much brou-ha-ha with regards to the European patent system, so presumably you folks are doing something right. I'm curious as to whether "a ton of staff" is the key.
One of the most worrying trends is the development of software patents which (unfortunately) especially the UK is pushing very hard for (yup, that's why the UK directive to 'consider Open Source alongsize proprietary solutions' is not as valuable as it seems). Do you see any alternatives to the present yes/no binary answer?
The EU, Africa and Russia have all threatened to bypass U.S. drug company patents on drugs used to combat H.I.V. in order to reduce the costs of distribution to the people who need them.
Could you ever see the same measures taken in terms of technology to help bridge the digital divide?
Thanks!
tcd004
Read the EXTREME Worst-Case Scenario Guidebook
With the millions of technical papers, conference proceedings, theses, dissertations, textbooks, previous patents, and other publications, how does the patent office verify that technical content is acutally patentable (novel and non-obvious) and owned by the submitter? Further, is there a way that the technical communities could assist in preventing these troublesome patents?
//TODO: Think of witty sig statement
It's too bad we can'r interview a US patent official. My first question then would be "Does it hurt to have your head that far up your ass?".
I am a research student from the UK. I am currently researching a relatively new area in computing. My research is novel and my own work. A company with an "aggressive patent program" (Quote from their website) have placed several broad patents across my research area.
They basicly can stop me from using my research and take all my work from my posession.
My University does not stand up to any accusations. They do not have lawyers and any research is not worth a lawsuit even if I have strong evidence that my work was independant from their and only based on prior art.
My question is "Is there any way I can question their patents several years after they were accepted without involving large sums of money or my university?"
Mouse powered Chips, Open source Processors and Lego
Do you ever get put under pressure (e.g. lobbying, words with MP's etc) by big business to grant a patent, or are you just left to get on with it without any pressure being put on you?
Now tell us about the scariest, most unbelievable patent application you've ever seen.
[o]_O
The US system is based on the power of courts to arbitrate on ownership and validity after the fact. What would you describe as the basic theory behind the EU approach.
An Eye for an Eye will make the whole world blind - Gandhi
I've often needed to search patents to see if my software is infringing. One of the most difficult task I found was to understand what was described in the patent. It's hard even for patents that apply to my field (speech processing), so I'd like to understand how you (and other patent examiners) handle incomprehensible patents applying to fields that's not necessarly yours. Do you think that's the reason why so many dumb/obvious patents get through?
Opus: the Swiss army knife of audio codec
It seems to me that patents that are issued in the area of computer science are often of similar doubtful validity.
I thought that the purpose of a patent was to encourage innovation and technological advance, whereas what is happening now is quite the reverse.
Would rate of progress in genetics and computing slow if patents were abolished in these fields, copyright provides sufficient protection for the few years until the technology is overtaken by something newer and better.
When an application comes in, what is the mindset of the patent reviewer? Is that person skeptical and therefore attempts to prove it to be a valid patent, or is the goal to assume it's a legit claim and then disprove a patent? It's kind of an innocent until proven guilty, or guilty until proven innocent thing.
What can we, as the Slashdot community, open source community or just as people interested in fair patents, do within the framework of the European patent system to ensure that patents are allocated fairly and do not ride rough-shod over existing methods and devices?
Matt Thompson - Actuality - Insert product here.
I guess you wouldn't support compensating those who do knock down bad patents out of the Patent Office Employees Pension Fund? :)
Most Americans probably won't understand what this is about, but it's worth asking anyway..
With new states set to join the EU, and perhaps even more joining in the future, how will the patent office deal with this?
For example, a company in Romania could have a national patent on, say, a form of compression. A company in the EU may also hold a similar patent.
When Romania joins the EU what happens to harmonize the patent law across the EU? Does the EU patent immediately get preferential treatment? Or does the older patent of the two get the final EU patent?
If this is the case, could a company in a country currently outside the EU get broad patents for a whole bunch of areas, and then claim licencing fees when they join the EU and have their patents validated?
Also, what happens to patents currently held in multiple countries already in the EU? Does the EU take precedence, or do the countries have to fight it out? For example, people in Sweden and the UK might both have patents on the same thing!
mogorific carpentry experiments
Do you see any chance of the rest of the world succeding in forcing USA to behave? For example, could we threaten to exclude USA from the international patent treaties, and stop enforcing US patents anywhere else?
In Murphy We Turst
Being a patent officer obviously requires knowledge in various areas. Is the patent office devided into various sections (mechanical, computers, agricultural, etc...)?
And what about enhancing your knowledge? How do you tackle new technologies that are coming out. What tools are given to you in order for you to do your job? (training, seminars, courses, books, etc...)
It's better to burn out than to fade away
What made you want to become a patent examiner?
If you can't see the value in jet powered ants you should turn in your nerd card. - Dunbal (464142)
At a conference I attended end of last year, the EPO's director admitted that software patents had been accorded to companies, without a legal basis from the EU.
What is the legal status of these patents? Do they have any value, or could any court throw them out? Does it even have to go to court? And how does the EPO justify such (IMHO, illegal, but IANAL) practice?
In the US (probably in the EU, also), you aren't allowed to defend yourself at a patent trial because it's assumed that you can't understand the patent.
On the other hand, the only reason patents exist is to convince inventors to put their research out there for everyone to see and build upon (after a certain time period).
So, if these inventors are supposed to look at a patent and it's supposed to be "reduced to practice" then they're supposed to be able to implement it, right? Which means that they have to understand the patent right? If they're expected to EXTEND the patent, then they have to understand the current patent right?
But they can't understand a patent since they're not patent lawyers...
It makes no sense to me. If people are assumed to be unable to understand a patent unless they're patent lawyers, and if the only reason patents exist is to let engineers avoid reinventing the wheel by reading and understanding the patents, then aren't they worthless?
Or if not, could you explain the legal contortions that give two totally separate meanings to "understanding" a patent?
Best. Comment. Ever. Enjoy!