Slashdot Mirror


White House May Name Patent Reform Opponent As New Head of Patent Office

An anonymous reader writes The Obama Administration is set to appoint Phil Johnson, a pharmaceutical industry executive, as the next Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office, according to sources. The move is likely to anger patent reform advocates given Johnson's past efforts to block legislation aimed at reining in patent trolls, and in light of his positions that appear to contradict the White House's professed goal of fixing the patent system. The top job at the Patent Office has been vacant for around 18-months since the departure of previous director David Kappos in early 2013. Currently, the office is being managed by former Googler Michelle Lee, who was appointed deputy director in December. Earlier this month, Republican Senators led by Orrin Hatch (R-UT) sent a letter to President Obama that praised Lee but that also described the current USPTO management structure as "unfair, untenable and unacceptable for our country's intellectual property agency."

4 of 211 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Obama by oneiros27 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I don't think you can blame him for Guantanamo -- he's been blocked by Congress on that one: http://www.politifact.com/trut...

    If you want to complain, you'll have to find some that you can actually blame on him ... luckily, you have lots to choose from : http://www.politifact.com/trut...

    (and this is why when I ran for office, I only made one promise -- that I'd give fair consideration to everything put before me ... which meant I once had to abstain from a vote when I found that some complaints had been withheld, as I couldn't research if they were legitimate complaints or not)

    --
    Build it, and they will come^Hplain.
  2. Re:Classic $Politician by Trailer+Trash · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Obama seems to be the first mainstream US presidential candidate in a long time to "talk the talk" to the kind of people who read Slashdot. The others have been spouting ignorant crap or simply ignoring the topics that most Slashdotters care about. Therefore Obama is the first president that we can be disappointed in -- the others were known bad before they became presidents.

    Um, maybe to you. I saw Obama coming a mile away, he's admittedly even more of a let down than I or anyone else could imagine but I knew the vapid talk was just that. I'm glad you admit that he fooled you, most on your side keep claiming that he's actually not an embarrassing failure and that things are way better than when Bush was in office.

  3. Re:Obama by ColdWetDog · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Oh you are quite wrong. The ACA (Obamacare) is not a giveaway to the pharmaceutical industry. That would be very low. It is, in fact, a giveaway to the insurance industry. And the lawyers.

    The insurance industry and lawyers are like the laws of thermodynamics - you can't win any battles with them, you can't even battle to a draw, and you have to play with them.

    --
    Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  4. Re:Classic Obama by Penguinisto · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This does lead to an interesting question... and not a troll, I promise:

    Now mind you, I'm not saying that suddenly everyone should vote Republican (I'm registered as "no party" in my own state), but I want to know how the folks who support the President no-matter-what can continue the cognitive dissonance and devotion to the guy in spite of crap like this (and much, much more). We see a lot of it even here on /. , so I think it's relevant. Even towards the end of the Bush years, you never saw this level of personality cult... and yet I'm bombarded with folks who will hotly defend the guy no matter what he does (my perception may be biased due to living in Portland, but still...)

    Does anyone else see this? And if you are among those who still support the guy, please tell me why not support someone such as a Green Party candidate, or someone who isn't part of the party machine, so to speak?

    PS: Simply pointing the finger at The Other Party doesn't really cut it either, IMHO (mostly because I find both to be equally distasteful) - in other words, give me an answer that doesn't involve fear of someone else...

    PPS: Please be civil about it to each other and otherwise - this is an honest question.

    --
    Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?