Slashdot Mirror
US Senate Targets Patent Trolls
New submitter jeffkoch writes: Last year, the United States Senate failed to pass bipartisan legislation to combat patent trolls when it was killed by then-Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada. Congressional-insider newspaper Roll Call reports today that, "Knowing Reid would no longer control the Senate's legislative schedule in 2015, staff for John Cornyn, (a Republican from Texas), and Charles E. Schumer, (a Democrat from New York)", began work in February to assemble a new bill and to build support among fellow members of the Senate. Patent law is usually not a partisan issue, and President Barack Obama has called for getting an overhaul to his desk on several occasions including in his 2014 State of the Union speech. The last overhaul of United States patent law, the America Invents Act, took several years to be developed. The U.S. Congress is likely to act on the proposed legislation before they recess in August. "Patent trolls are taking a system meant to drive innovation and instead using it to stifle job-creating businesses around the country. Main Street stores, tech startups and more are being smothered by the abuse that is all too common in our patent system, and it's time for that to end," Schumer said in a statement. "This bipartisan bill shifts the legal burden back onto those who would abuse the patent system in order to make a quick buck at the expense of businesses that are playing by the rules."
Sheila Jackson Lee saves him from being the most embarrassing rep from Texas, meaning, yes you can get lower.
(at least he's getting this one right)
The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
..the lobbyists descend like vultures and kill the bill in 3....2....1....
Large corporations will gain protection from patent trolls and small legitimate patent holders.
Patent law is usually not a partisan issue, ...
Whenever something is not a partisan issue, that means the political class is all in favor of it. Ask yourself "why" they are in favor of it.
See, my fellow peons, when the political class gets in line for an issue that means we, the people are going to get fucked. Stop voting for your guy because you're afraid the "otherside" will win.
Let's have a binary sort of politicians.
Vote for your guy. Go ahead.
If he fails. Vote against him in the next election even if it means voting for the party you detest.
It's OK. The "other guy" can't do that much damage in one term - hopefully. Although the whole PATRIOT Act bullshit does fly in the face of my method. But for normal shit ...
Then, hopefully the asshole is out and you can vote for someone who says they stand for what you believe in. If he doesn't, vote against him - again, for the "other guys".
If we keep doing this it could work.
See, I have witnessed to many times very intelligent people voting for someone they don't quite like because they're terrified that the "other guys" could win - even though my state is completely in the hands of "their guy".
Stop it people. We DO have the government we deserve.
The biggest problem appears to be allowing wide interpretations of patents and ignoring what would be obviousness in the eyes of most practitioners. Here are some suggestions:
1) A jury-like panel of practitioners to judge obviousness.
2) Spell out that merely emulating common physical actions or behaviors should not be patentable, only specific algorithms of such emulation.
3) Reject the mere combining of existing ideas unless the combining is judged non-obvious (#1).
4) Limiting the percentage of revenue a medium or large company can receive from patent royalties.
5) An independent quality review board to make sure approved patents are not overly broad. They'd randomly sample patents.
Table-ized A.I.
>>legislation to combat patent trolls when it was killed by then-Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada.
... then (pseudo) solve it.
Sen. Reid said that the reason they didn't bring it to a floor vote is that Senators from both parties had made it clear they would filibuster the bill, so there would be no vote.
There were some good reasons for the resistance. Some of the compromises made in the Senate to the bill last year were a gift to large companies because it would limit the rights of those seeking redress for patent infringement.
Even Sen. Leahy, the bill's primary sponsor in the Senate admitted that. He said,
Source
Oh yeah, last November, here.
Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
Does anyone else care to bet that any bill coming out of the Senate to curb "patent trolls" is going to end up extending patents even longer and basically making the patent system even worse? Does anyone believe that the result of this legislation will be patent law that does a better job of encouraging innovation?
John Cornyn and Chuck Schumer are two of the biggest corporatists in the Senate. They're not looking to make the patent system work better for anyone but their donors. I don't trust them to do anything good when it comes to intellectual property laws.
You are welcome on my lawn.
It seems to me that the big thing they need to to remove the 'use' restriction on patents.
That is, you can use a patented technology, you just can't sell anything that uses it. This would require someone that claims they own a patent regarding WiFi, for instance, to sue those making/selling the routers, not individuals/small businesses buying them.
US Senate Targets Patent Trolls with ads soliciting campaign contributions.
- FTFY
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
In the 2014 election, John Cornyn won because of weak competition.
..don't like patent trolls because it's harder for Chinese companies to ransack everything if their not trolled for doing so..
And Sen. Reid is a known opportunist liar. Remember when he said on the Senate floor that he had been given information about how Mitt Romney wasn't paying taxes. When called on it recently, he all but admitted he was lying in order to get Obama reelected.
Fun fact, a corporation in Malaysia will be able to force your US State to rescind a lawsuit filed against a Malaysian owned patent troll.
Think about it.
Are you feeling like a Serf yet?
Wrong. Serfs had more rights than you do.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
So over the last week the GOP has bills to make the EPA only regulate based on publicly available science that can be peer reviewed and they are "anti-science".
They now propose a bill to stop patent trolls and are now "big business and anti-little guy".
Now its pointed out how H. Reid refused to do anything and he is the victim of the GOP.
How idiotic are we supposed to be? Seems CLEARLY like one party is trying to improve things and the other is the party of no and false blame for not acting.
Good law. They should patent it!
When it comes to stuff like this, it's better to go straight to the source, rather than repeat things you've heard.
Senator Reid did not "all but admit" to lying. Take a look at the actual interview, starting at 2:45 in the video:
There is no admission of deceit, just an admission that it was politically motivated.
Sharpen your sticks and pitchforks... we're going hunting boys & girls!
What's on the menu you ask?
Take your pick.
Hence the "all but admitted". He admitted that the ends justified the means.
Additionally, there was never any actual proof or facts found that Romney didn't pay taxes...
...For campaign contributions.
Any insufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology.
And Sen. Reid is a known opportunist liar.
To be fair, this pretty much describes 95% of the elected critters on Capitol Hill. By using the title "Senator" the rest of your statement was pretty much redundant.
Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
You are assuming that the parties are monolithic blocks, which is incorrect. Many of them will grandstand on an issue that is not supported by their party if they think it will help their reelection, and some will do it for ideological reasons even if their party is on the opposite side.
BOTH parties are trying to centralize control. Both parties are trying to do what different constituencies want. And both are actually more interested in supporting the goals of unspoken backers. Neither of them puts the good of either the country or of the citizenry first, but both will take stands that allow them to claim to do so...to different constituencies.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
Lookie, another "The DNC was proven beyond any possible doubt that it is clearly corrupt" and out comes the "Both parties are the same".
Bzzzt, if both parties were the same both bills I listed would have been passed already or at least had a vote on record for them. The DNC is anti-middle class and anti-little guy as much as is possible. Just look at their presidential candidate, she lies about foreign donations after promising to make them all public and to not take them while Sec. of State and their "charity" only give 10% of what they take in to charity cases, they keep the other 90% for themselves. And SHE is the soon to be leader? Its like all the stories that were made up about Romney (mostly by H. Reid) are ACTUALLY TRUE about Mrs. Clinton and you all still support her and call people pointing it out names.
What a complete joke the DNC and its supporters have become. I don't think the party can be fixed, it needs to be disbanded.
The real problem is the Universities, as they meet the criteria for patent troll to a T. All Universities effectively act like patent trolls, and this would end their ability to control their IP.
No, what he said is nowhere near an admission of deceit. It was a declaration that what he said, both about Mr. Romney's taxes, and the Koch brothers, help re-elect President Obama, nothing more.
Just because no proof ever came to light doesn't mean Sen. Reid wasn't told that by someone he trusted. Remember, even at the time Sen. Reid was clear he had no definitive proof, just a person's claim.
"He didn't pay taxes for 10 years! Now, do I know that that's true? Well, I'm not certain, but obviously he can't release those tax returns. How would it look?"
The facts do not support your accusation that Sen. Reid is a "known opportunist liar".