Slashdot Mirror
USPTO to Use Peer to Patent Program
An anonymous reader writes "DailyTech is reporting that the US Patent and Trademark Office is going to start using the Peer to Patent program. From the article:' The US Patent and Trademark Office has been getting praise for officially launching the Peer to Patent program -- the purpose of Peer to Patent is to find patents that have been issued for already made products or items that don't properly qualify for a patent. Because the USPTO usually does not have the manpower and time to thoroughly check every patent that comes into the office, many are unjustly rubber stamped.' The program will utilize a Wiki, among other tools, to get the job done."
'bout time.
This sig rocks the casbah.
The most interesting thing on the site is the research style paper entitled "Peer to Patent": Collective Intelligence and Intellectual Property Reform by Beth Simone Noveck. There's an insane amount of footnotes on the first opening pages and it is a PDF so I will repost the abstract:
As you can see, it's a pretty far-reaching and very hopeful aim at fixing something that the vast majority of our community, Slashdot, view as a broken system.
So there you have it. Something is broken, here's the proposed solution now let's see if it works. The only possible show stopper I see here is that I'm not so sure it would benefit anyone to join this proposed community of "patent clerks." They are hoping for an army of people to read over patents and notice similarities or infringements for proposed patents. The Wiki's answer to my concer
My work here is dung.
I do hope that someone has patented this wonderful new technology!
(sorry, couldn't resist).
Creationist Textbook Stickers Declared Unconstitutional by CowboyNeal
Sounds like we already have that here on Slashdot; let us review patent applications. I am sure we can fair and unbiased, especially when it comes to software patents.
GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
I had to check the document date to make sure this wasnt a joke. How do we expect that the patent office will be able to take these peer patent reviews seriously? How will this stand up in a court of law?
Seems a bit shaky.
If you don't vote, you don't matter, so don't waste your time telling me your opinion
...as thousands of nerds choke on their breakfast upon realizing that the USPTO finally read their comments on Slashdot.
"how can they call it a MINE if everything here is THEIRS?!?!" -Straight Jacket
If they use a moderation system similar to slashdot's, there's no way it can fail!
;)
Finally, a fair, completely unbiased way to moderate things...just like on Wikipedia
Error 407 - No creative sig found
This will no doubt help matters, but still the burden of this work is being put on the wrong people. It should be on those who want the patent in the first place.
If an existing patent grant is subsequently overturned for reasons that the applicant could reasonably discovered themselves then they should be penalised. It should be expected that the applicant has searched exhaustively (or at least as much as can be reasonably expected) before applying in the first place. Why should anyone else have to bear that burden?
-- MartinG To mail me: echo kewyjlcxyzvjfxbqwh | tr bcefhjklqvwxyz
who in the public is going to take the time to review 1,000 patent applications a week, search for prior art, and send the relevant art to the USPTO
Yeah, that's like expecting thousands of people to write a complete OS and all the applications for it. It'll never happen.
I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
What makes you think this will improve matters? Who exactly is going to go reading patents and reviewing them for the patent office?
Lawyers? No... they'd be much more interested in spending their time on similar work that they actually get paid for.
Developers/scientists/engineers? No... (AFAIK, IANAL) most legal advice suggests that you shouldn't go reading about patents in your field, and instead just read patents whenever they become relevant to you. (when you're being sued for infringement, for example)
I struggle to see how the patent office is going to get much out of this. I also struggle to see why people should contribute (without being paid) to such a broken system. Contributing in this way will not make the system any less broken. It will more likely just make it a bit easier to keep running it.
It is astonishing to me that USPTO might be getting a bit of a clue after decades of sucking. They deserve our applause and our help; remember, we're the ones who have been so pissed at them for screwing up the software industry. They look sincere, so bury the hatchet and edit that wiki!
My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
I'd yell at people to RTFA, but the article gets it wrong, too. The reality isn't "USPTO to Use Peer to Patent Program" but "Some random article from a law school proposes USPTO should Use Peer to Patent Program".
This is an interesting idea, but nothing more than that; an idea.
It wasn't hard to figure out why, they were offering salaries nearly $15k lower than the competition. A CS/EE Master's degree and a 3.9-4.0 GPA would earn you something like $56k. In the DC area that's roughly $35k if you live somewhere with an average cost-of-living. Needless to say, most weren't too interested in the USPTO.
To make matters worse, the job is awful. You are given x number of patents a week, period. Whether or not you finish them you're still getting them piled on you. It's just one after the other, like sorting mail your whole life. They tried to make it sound exciting, but it just wasn't.
I spoke with some people who worked at the USPTO. They hated their lives. Their technical skills went completely to waste and they quickly learned you either become a patent lawyer or you flounder and die.
This grim picture is all the USPTO has to offer to incoming recruits, and no wonder they are understaffed. Lousy patents making it through the system makes sense when you're reduced to hiring the desperate and underqualified. That's why I'm excited about this program. It allows others to help make decisions and provide insight rather than placing the entire burden on an underpaid, understaffed government office. A much needed change.
Python code of a perfect peer to patent program:
def filterPatents (patents):
return []
Well, maybe we aren't that lucky, but it is always a beginning to get rid of the most stupid patents.
Actually, no. This is a pilot program. From the USPTO website:
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) will hold a briefing on May 12, 2006, from 9:00 a.m. to noon in the agency's Madison building, 600 Dulany Street, Alexandria, VA. The USPTO has created a partnership with academia and the private sector to launch an online, peer review pilot project that seeks to ensure that patent examiners will have improved access to all available prior art during the patent examination process.
As a follow-up to the February 16th meeting, this briefing will focus on further developing previously discussed initiatives as well as answering the question of what constitutes valid prior art and a greater in-depth analysis of the peer review pilot project that is under consideration.
The meeting is open to the public. However, space is limited so please register early. Only the first 220 registrations can be accepted.
The article links to the registration page, so it's a bit confusing.
I seem to remember some German Patent clerk making good in his spare time back in 1905. Al somebody. I think he invented the internet or physics or something.
1905 would have been about the last time Patent clerks had spare time.
And even that German guy got out of the business eventually, and found better things to do.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
... he didn't want to infringe on the patent I own, called "A mechanism to improve the relevance of electronic bulletin board comments via reading TFA."