Slashdot Mirror


Why United States Patent Reform Has Stalled

ectoman (594315) writes Proponents of patent reform in the United States glimpsed a potential victory late last year, when the House of Representatives passed H.R. 3309, the Innovation Act, designed to significantly mitigate patent abuse. Just months ago, however, the Senate pulled consideration of the bill. And since then, patent reform has been at a standstill. In a new analysis for Opensource.com, Mark Bohannon, Vice President of Corporate affairs and Global Public Policy at Red Hat, explains three reasons why. "For this year, at least," he writes, "the prospect of addressing abusive patent litigation through Congressional action is on ice"—despite the unavoidable case for reform.

14 of 139 comments (clear)

  1. Uh, what? by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The article seems to explain what is [not] happening, not why. But I thought we already knew why. It's called the influence of money on politics.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    1. Re:Uh, what? by i+kan+reed · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well, the senate is complicated, and we could go into the whole details of how anonymous holds work, the potential for "single senator" filibusters, the difficulties of getting things out of committee in the face of a single powerful shill against the bill. The likely imperfections in the bill's language that would make those who actually support the concept to not support the actual thing, the fact that one party actively made a mission of having no bipartisan bills pass until Obama is out of office, or the relative lack of popular support outside of the tech sector.

      Any or all of those could have come to into play. But it's easier to pretend that those damn [other party] have the opposite of America's best interest at heart.

    2. Re:Uh, what? by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The current Senate leadership has already unilaterally rewritten the rules regarding filibusters and some nominations/appointments; it could very easily do it (and with political/voter impunity as we saw from the previous rewrite) again to push this through. The pulling of a bill in the Senate happens because one man doesn't want a vote on it: Harry Reid. I suspect somewhere he's getting millions - or the promise of tens of thousands of votes - to pull the bill. He's the block in the Senate.

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    3. Re:Uh, what? by MightyMartian · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Or, to put it another way, Congressmen are vile repugnant greedy pigs.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    4. Re:Uh, what? by HornWumpus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Except that's not what happened here. In this case the party in charge of the Senate prevented it from leaving committee. Protecting their shyster master's cash cow.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  2. Why find a solution... by tysonedwards · · Score: 4, Insightful

    When there is money to be made in perpetuating the problem?

    --
    Thirty four characters live here.
  3. Politics by jellomizer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Here is the problem.
    The Right Wing Media has done such a good job a painting the Democrats and Obama as pure Evil, is that any sign of working with the Democrats on anything is a sign that they are being manipulated. So these politicians cannot dare to do anything that will make Obama side considered a win. As if they did they will get voted out in the next primaries.

    The Left Wing Media makes the Right Wing like they are so out of touch and evil, so the Right feels constantly threatened, thus makes their stance more resolved.

    This degree of Polarization has gone to the Crazy level.
    Simple common sense solutions will not go threw because it was the other side who came up with it first.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    1. Re:Politics by TWX · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The Left Wing Media makes the Right Wing like they are so out of touch and evil, so the Right feels constantly threatened, thus makes their stance more resolved.

      I don't think that we listen to the same radio stations. I listen to NPR a lot (the virtue of driving around a lot during the day) and they talk about issues, not political stances.

      I have heard right-wing radio on at places that I've had to visit, and they talk about their opposition, demonizing them. They didn't really talk about actual issues.

      I attempted to listen to left-wing radio like Air America, and I couldn't. They attempted to operate the same way as right-wing radio. It put me off for the same reason that right-wing radio did, it only served to demonize, not to actually discuss anything. So I went back to NPR to hear about issues again.

      I don't listen to the radio as much as I used to, actually. I realized that the 24 hour news cycle becomes a massively self-referential thing, and that it exists to feed itself on itself and the listener. It has to make things seem important to survive, any little deviation or difference suddenly becomes big news in order to garner the attention needed to keep the advertising dollars rolling in. As a consequence it needs inflammatory people that are willing to say disgusting things, which in-turn destroys polite discourse and factionalizes people that really don't come into this with any stake in it to begin with.

      Turn off your TV, turn off your radio, stop visiting political websites and listening to political podcasts. Go do something for yourself that you choose to do, and the circle-jerk will reduce.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    2. Re:Politics by jellomizer · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I do listen to NPR. They have gotten a bit more moderate, however their is a liberal tone in their discussions.

      They are not Rant Radio. But they are more apt to paint a negative image to the Tea Party without trying to show their virtues. As well the Occupy movement they made them seem a bit more organized and virtuous then they actually were.

      That said NPR actually tries to give you news, Not commentary. But they get their views out in deciding what stories to play, and what isn't worth it.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    3. Re:Politics by DoofusOfDeath · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Also, I've noticed that their non-news programming absolutely has an anti-conservative bent (with some exceptions).

      For example, I really like Wait Wait Don't Tell Me. But the participants tend to take swipes mostly at conservatives and conservative views, and the audience tends to whoop and applaud along the same lines.

      I recall another story where they did a sympathy piece on an illegal immigrant. But they never broached the subject of the people seeking proper visas whom she "cut in line", nor the possible identify fraud if she was using a SS#, nor the other low-skilled Americans who had to compete with here for a limited number of low-skilled jobs. Strangely, when I wrote my local NPR ombudsman regarding this, I never got a reply.

  4. Re:Can I blame... by jellomizer · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Yes you can, the world would run so much smoother if they all had the same opinions and beliefs that I do.

    This type of thinking is the first step to tyranny. As any opposing opinion must either be from the Stupid (who needs to be reeducated), Coerced (Where we need to find the ring leader spreading the ideas), or from some evil in them (Where they need to be jailed or killed)

    Many Tyrants of the world came from people who had good ideas and gained and used their power to try to make real. Unfortunately there always seems to be a part of the population who has a different view that needs to be controlled.

    In America sometimes I am very frustrated that our government doesn't move much because they just don't seem to agree on any little thing. However due to the fact that they do disagree, and not feel like the government is going to go out and kill them for disagreeing with them is also comforting.

    When you have a government where all the people are working smoothly and efficiently without much conflict. Actually is very scary because you need to ask yourself why does everyone agree with this. Especially as every choice you make normally has some sort of trade-off which someone else may take the different path.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  5. Hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I think you'll find that avoiding that particular symbol is fairly straightforward.

  6. TLDR by wienerschnizzel · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Here's the meat part:

    "This was entirely done by the pharmaceutical industry and the trial lawyers."

    ...

    Pharmaceutical and biotech firms are often plaintiffs in patent disputes and haven't been hit hard by troll lawsuits.

    ...

    Many law firms working in traditional plaintiffs' areas like personal injury or securities class actions have added patent work as other sources have dried up.

    Fucking. Lawyers.

  7. Re:Gotta pay whoever comes up with this stuff! by JesseMcDonald · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm sorry, were you going for +1, Funny or -1, Naive? What you stated is indeed the standard line in support of patents, but unfortunately for that argument there is little evidence to suggest that patents actually foster innovation. There is, on the other hand, plenty of evidence to support the opposite position, that patents, like pretty much every other monopoly imposed by law, have a tendency to impede natural innovation and raise barriers to entry. Innovation occurred before patents, and would continue to occur if we eliminated all patents tomorrow. Perhaps not exactly the same kind or to the same extent, but rather the kinds and extent of innovation which make sense given supply and demand in the absence of artificial subsidies—the kind where innovators profit by enriching society rather than wasting resources in pursuit of monopoly rent-seeking.

    --
    "The state is that great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else." - Bastiat