Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Patent Review via Community Not Wiki-based

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the close-though dept.

Moe Napoli writes "Articles have recently surfaced (CNET/ZDnet, Fortune and a mention here at Slashdot) incorrectly identifying the recent USPTO pilot Community Patent Review program to be Wiki-based. While a number of Slashdotters have identified why such an approach would create more problems than solve, the program's architect, NYLS Prof. Beth Noveck, continues the discussion and further clarifies why the program is not Wiki-based, yet 'conveys the appropriate sense of openness, transparency and collaboration.'"

4 of 40 comments (clear)

  1. Questions... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting
    Where do we post our review of every software, logic and business method patent ever granted by the USPTO? How much are they paying us to do the job USPTO examiners are incapable of doing themselves?

  2. Re:Uh Oh! Tax dollar Sinkhole? by LaughingCoder · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Then a lot of the 'maybes' could be thrown out.

    I think you have nailed it here. The problem is the huge number of *suspect* patents. And the primary cause of these patents is the tremendous number of filings, compounded with their increasing complexity.

    Personally, I think we need a fundamental change in the patent system. It is simply too difficult to provide a gate-keeping function. The quality of the screening inevitably becomes less and less accurate and effective over time. Instead, what if companies/inventors could file their "patent" without any "examination". It would really be more of a "patent registration". The patent would become instantly public. This would dramatically diminish the perceived "power" of a patent, since anyone could get one with a minimal filing fee. Then, let the lawyers and courts sort out the conflicts. And the loser pays court costs. For the smaller inventors, perhaps some sort of "public patent defender" could be provided. In the end that system is not very unlike what we have now, except that we would save enormous resources "screening" the patents. The government's role becomes one of documentarian only. And of course the judicial system would still be involved as before, adjudicating the conflicts. This effectively postpones the "examination" process to the end, only to be done when "conflicts" are suspected by the patent holder.

    --
    The more you regulate a company, the worse its products become.
  3. Re:Uh Oh! Tax dollar Sinkhole? by thebdj · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Psst. The USPTO is one of the few, if not only, government office that, get this, MAKE MONEY. All the money funding the PTO comes from fees collected by the PTO. Actually, Congress doles out only part of those fees back to the PTO and spends the money for other agencies. The freeing of this fund solely to the PTO has been a point of contention in the past, since the PTO obviously needs more money.

    So do not worry. Your money does not currently and probably never will fund the US Patent and Trademark Office. (As for my credentials, I was a patent examiner. So I think I can provide some insight in this matter.)

    --
    "Some days you just can't get rid of a bomb."
  4. Re:Uh Oh! Tax dollar Sinkhole? by __aayurq3262 · · Score: 2, Interesting
    In the end, I'm afraid this is just another government office or agency that's going to balloon out of control and consume tax payer dollars.
    That's not likely. The U.S. Patent Office charges fees for all of the work it does. It's required to charge enough to meet all of its expected expenses, including the cost of additional examiners and improvements it thinks it needs. However, Congress also limits what it's allowed to spend and keeps the difference, so the Patent Office can't make the improvements they are required to plan and charge for. It's one of the few government agencies that actually makes money for the government.