Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Patent Office Shows Record Backlog

Posted by michael on from the free-money-get-your-free-money-here dept.

acroyear writes "WTOP, 1500am, a news radio station in the DC area, is reporting that the Patent Office Is Seeing Record Backlog, with 2 years for a patent now, and potentially 4 years to wait by decade's end, and the PTO is considering a 15% increase in filing fees. Personally, I think if they had set a trend of actually rejecting patents that don't belong, they'd have sent enough of a message to keep application numbers to a reasonable level; right now, everybody files because just about everything can get one."

8 of 235 comments (clear)

  1. Yeah... by CrazyDuke · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yeah, and us poor schmucks who can't afford several grand in expences have to get a corporation to help and hope they don't screw us. Too bad I can't make any money off of these ideas I have. Innovation my ass.

    --
    Any sufficiently advanced influence is indistinguishable from control.
    1. Re:Yeah... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful


      Patents are meant to protect actual entrepeneurs, not just people that sit around in their parents' basement and "invent things". Once upon a time, the Patent Office required an actual working prototype instead of just Powerpoint slides.

      If you're one of those guys that likes to file a zillion applications for vague ideas and then hope to sue someone else that actually produces an independent product ten years later, I have no sympathy for you. You could at least look on your few grand as an investment in your extortion scheme.

      And if you have a useful idea and can actually put it into production, you'll need to start a company. A few grand for a patent application is peanuts compared to the cost of actually making anything out of some idea. Very often, the idea itself isn't actually the important part; the execution is.

  2. Assumptions by RealityMogul · · Score: 5, Insightful

    everybody files because just about everything can get one

    Now we've all seen plenty of stories where stupid patents have been granted. But I don't think we're getting the entire picture. If they grant thousands of patents a year and we only see 20 stupid patent articles, then maybe they aren't doing the terrible job we're assuming they are. Maybe they are rejecting patents but we just don't hear about it because companies don't publicize their rejections.

    I'm not claiming to have first-hand knowledge of the USPO but it's food for thought.

  3. DAMMIT *I* INVENTED THE RECORD BACKLOG!!! by corebreech · · Score: 5, Funny

    Those bastards!

    --
    Is this truly the only Earth I can live on?
  4. The government should create a "patent tax" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    That way, the filing fees can remain low, but valuable patents (which in theory may require more protection) will pay the government for that protection. Something like 1% of profits on the invention. So, a million dollar idea would get the government $10,000 in exchange for the patent protection. If your idea never makes you money (say over $1000), then you don't need to pay it.

  5. What kind of ads to they use by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Got fired from your rebate handling job because you were too slow processing applications? Fear no more! Get a job at the patent office!

  6. So let me see if I have this straight... by bittmann · · Score: 5, Insightful

    From the article:


    Last year the office issued an average of more than 3,000 patents a week. It is one of the few federal agencies that brings in more money than it spends.

    Some of that money is siphoned off to other agencies _ more than $630 million since 1992.

    The Patent Office has a positive cash flow. They actually take in more in fees than they consume, with the excess being diverted to non-productive (from a patent standpoint, anyway) agencies.

    So, *of course* the only way for them to process more patents per time unit is to raise the fees.

    Yes, I do realize that there are most likely mitigating factors (dealing with problems of expansion, etc.) that come in to play, here, which would make a noticable jump in speed more expensive. But, initial inspection of the problem does tend to make me think "plow the profits back in to the organization. Make *more* profits that way. Remember: The more we process, the more we *generate* here..."

    Or could it possibly be an idea of "raise the fee enough to drive off all of these pesky little inventors...thus reducing our workload."

    Nah...they wouldn't think that way...would they?

  7. Re:Fee Schedule by ivan256 · · Score: 5, Informative

    2) reject anything with prior art

    Already done.

    NO IT'S NOT!

    I'm sick of people with no clue spouting this shit in slashdot comments and getting modded up to propagate this incorrect information.

    Repeat after me: You can patent things that have prior art.

    In fact, it's completely allowed and the prior art is usually documented right in the application. A patent does NOT mean the holder has exclusive rights to everything in the patent. It only gives them exclusive rights on the claims that exceed the prior art. Half the time I see people bitching about some silly patent on here, they fail to take this into account.

    Please people, before you go spouting off about prior art in patents, make sure you know what you're talking about and that you didn't get that information from a slashdot comment that was posted by somebody who could be a clueless toddler for all you know.