Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

EFF, PubPat Each Seeking Some Patent Sanity

Posted by timothy on from the needs-more-shooters dept.

AbstracTus writes "According to Wired, The Electronic Frontier Foundation is trying to get the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to re-examine 10 patents that were selected from public submissions. We slashdotters often curse patents that should have been rejected, but are not. Do you think that the EFF can have any influence on the U.S. Patent Office? Are there other actions that are more likely to work?" And sharkb8 writes "The Public Patent Foundation is searching for people with experience in all technical fields to help examine patents. This is the perfect chance for attorneys, law students, and geeks in general to do some pro bono work. PubPat is the group that recently challenged one of Microsoft's FAT patents."

2 of 201 comments (clear)

  1. Hmm by Erwos · · Score: 5, Informative

    The problems with the US patent office are two-fold:
    1. Patent examiners are EXTREMELY over-worked. My future brother-in-law is a patent examiner, and he's often told me of a draconian quota system that rewards being quick and sloppy.
    2. The US government is pro-business (as it should be, IMHO). However, this translates into the default standing order at the USPTO being "accept", and not "reject" (whereas most /.'ers want to see "reject" as the default position).

    The USPTO recently underwent some changes (new computer system, IIRC) that should allow patent examiners to be a little bit more effective in the future. But it's obvious to me the USPTO has problems - and they are management issues, not really idiot patent examiners.

    -Erwos

    --
    Plausible conjecture should not be misrepresented as proof positive.
  2. No reason not to patent by Lars+Clausen · · Score: 5, Informative

    Apart from the obvious reasons to patent things (others might get there first), there's no good reason not to. The fee to apply is very low, and there is no penalty for being denied or overturned. At the same time, the examiners (AFAIHH) get bonuses based on how many patents they pass. The way to go currently, especially if you're a big company, is to try patenting everything you can, you might not get all, but the drop-out doesn't hurt you.

    One way to change this would be to institute some penalty for filing dodgy patents. Both for the examiner who passed it and for whoever got it. A fine at least and repayment of any license fees garnered on the patent. Covering of expenses for the challenger, perhaps? A system of extra checking of patents from companies/persons that have had patents overturned previously? Repeat offenders? Three strikes and you're out? The possibilities are endless, but frivolous patenting should be as serious an offense as infringing on a patent.

    -Lars