Still being developed....
Just search for FreeDOS and then shake your head in disgust.....
Sorry that you aren't as enthusiastic about it as we are.
Yes, we're still working on FreeDOS. In fact, if you visit our web site you'll see that we are currently working on the FreeDOS 1.1 distribution. We're almost there! After that is out, we'll start the discussion for what FreeDOS "2.0" should be, what a modern DOS should look like in 2011.
A recent load of FreeDOS in a VM worked great. The larger download came with tons of cool software too, but so far Tetris is about the only thing easy to identify from the DOS filename. Sigh... (everything was identified with descriptions when installed, but we old fossils can't remember much stuff like that an hour later)
And you may be interested to know that FreeDOS is still being developed. We're working on a FreeDOS 1.1 distribution (mostly an update to the 1.0 distribution, plus a few noticeable changes.) We are discussing an August release. After that, we will start planning the "2.0" distribution, which I hope will see a "modernization" of what a DOS system should look like in 2011.
8 shows/month is a lot of TV? That's obviously a bit more than 1/day. You watch VASTLY less TV than others do.
I refer you to earlier in my comment, where I noted that we also watch movies and past seasons of TV via Netflix. So 8 shows of current TV is a lot for us, because we're also watching other stuff.
That said, we probably do watch less TV than most people. I think we watch 2 hours a night, maybe 3. The rest of the time we talk to one another.
I'm also a happy Netflix customer, and will remain so - as long as the math works out. For me, it's a math problem: We dropped cable TV a year ago, subscribed to Netflix, and use Amazon Instant Video for current shows.
The math:
Cable TV in my area... about $80 per month, for the channels I'd want to watch.
Netflix (new price)... $16 per month. We watch movies and catch up on some TV series (that we didn't watch the first time around) using Netflix. Streaming is great for shows and some movies, but they don't have everything available on streaming, so the "DVD + streaming" plan is a must-have for us.
That leaves $64 per month to spend on Amazon, before we break even with cable TV.
TV on Amazon... $2 per episode. Assume a weekly show gives 4 episodes per month, so $8 per month per show. That works out to 8 shows per month until we break even with the cost of cable TV. That's a lot of TV, and we just don't watch that much TV.
Is it just me or are these lawsuits just getting more and more ridiculous? What will it take before patent laws are thrown out the window and replaced with something sane?
I'm waiting to see companies go bankrupt and lives be destroyed over this idiocy. I expect people won't actually wake up until some distraught small business owner goes postal and slaughters a bunch of people.
I've said this before on slashdot, and I'll say it again here: the problem with software patents will not go away unless people contact their lawmakers and demand change in the patent system. Especially if you live in Minnesota, New York, Rhode Island, Connecticut, Oklahoma, Utah, or South Carolina. Because if so, your senator sits on a very important committee: U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary Subcommittee on Privacy, Technology and the Law. But no matter what state you are in, your senator or representative does listen to constituents who contact them, moreso when you call or visit. Letters do work, too, but admittedly it's less effective than meeting in person, or a phone call. (If you do write, make it handwritten - they pay attention to the effort.)
If we can get several of these senators to understand how "software" patents are stifling innovation of American technology companies, how US companies are spending so much time and money fighting "software" patents when those resources could go to R&D, then the subcommittee can take action. Contact your senator's office, and voice your concerns over "software" patents. Note that you don't actually have to speak with your senator - ask to speak with the staffer who usually deals with technology issues. An alternate contact might be their State Director.
Ultimately, changing how the USPTO considers "software" patents will require a change in law. The right place for this to start is with your congressperson. Remember: it's the job of your senator or US representative to listen to you and bring your concerns to the floor. All it takes is a phone call.
But I know it's oh-so-trendy for people to say "by congresscritters only listen to cash in their pocket" (these people are giving up) and I expect the inevitable followup.
I hope everyone responded to the USPTO's call for comments or contacted your Senator and US Representative about patent reform. Because that's the only way the US patent system is going to get fixed.
Your congresscritter really does want to hear from you. It's your job to contact them, and ask them to reform software patents. Seriously, call their office, write them a letter (handwritten carries the most impact, but typed will do), or visit them in their office. Have some examples handy, like this one. I've been discussing software patents with Sen. Franken's office for a while now, so if you don't have a particular suggestion to offer, ask your Senator to see what Sen. Franken is up to. I'm not kidding, they do listen to comments like that.
When I spoke with my Senator's office and my Representative's office, they both talked how business doesn't want software patent reform. They get this impression by talking to lobbyists, who are presenting one side of the story. But when even a company like Google looks to buy a patent portfolio just to use it in defense... they start to pay attention.
Now we're seeing the small developer - possibly the "next generation" innovator - leaving the market because of software patents. The article talks mostly about non-US developers, but there's a mention of small US-based devs too. And it won't be too long before we hear about how bigger US developers are dropping out over patents. Or even a major name in Free/Open Source Software.
On Slashdot, we've been bitching about software patent reform for years (and I have a low UID). Let's do something! Call or write today! It only takes 5 minutes to get someone on the phone, and get your opinion out there.
>> Do anything...anything!...where you're producing or growing rather than just consuming.
> Then what should one do to unwind after a day of producing?
Speaking for myself, I'm not a big fan of the Big Blue Room with the Yellow Face (it burns us!) But we'll do walks, or whatever, and that's outside. When we don't want to do stuff outside, and don't want to watch a movie or television, there's also video games.
> Until you get into the kinds of shows that Netflix, Amazon, and PSN just can't provide, such as Monday Night Football or The Rachel Maddow Show. Or have they picked up news and sports lately?
I don't watch sports, neither does my wife, so I don't really know where to point you for sports. I think there's an option for that somewhere though, maybe even on PSN or Amazon. I just don't know.
As for news: why would you watch news on television? I stay current on news by reading news web sites. There are a few US sites I use regularly, plus Google News for "trending news", and BBC for a "foreign" perspective.
For me, it's a math problem. I moved a year ago, and we decided to drop cable TV. Instead, we subscribed to Netflix, and regularly use Amazon Instant Video and PlayStation Network.
Look at it this way: Looking at the cost of cable TV (at our old house, but it's about the same here) it was about $80 per month.
But without cable TV, we're watching (mostly) the same shows from Amazon and PSN for $2 per episode. We watch movies and catch up on series (that we didn't watch the first time around) using Netflix. Streaming is great for shows and some movies, but they don't have everything available on streaming, so DVDs are a must-have for us.
Now the cost of Netflix is $16 per month. That's $64 remaining per month to spend on Amazon and PSN. Assuming 4 episodes per month of a current show, we're spending $8 per month per show on Amazon or PSN. That works out to 8 shows per month until we break even with the cost of cable TV. And that's a lot of TV, we just don't watch that much TV.
So at our house, we looked at the price increase as a measure of how that impacts our Amazon and PSN viewership. And so far, we're not unhappy with the price increase. Still less expensive to use Netflix + Amazon + PSN, rather than cable TV.
Hell yeah but they answered "This is an American thing, stupid geek, you are living in Europe."
I know you are joking (or trolling) but you should know that several EU countries are considering changing their patent system to be more like the US. So if you live in the EU, you should be concerned about what's happening to the US patent system, because you might be next.
Did you bother to read the blog I linked to? I know this is Slashdot, but it helps if you RTFA. I know the America Invents Act doesn't do anything about software patents. From the linked blog:
The "America Invents Act" bill tries to "fix" some things in the US patent system, but unfortunately does nothing for software patents. The AIA already passed the Senate, and is about to go for vote in the House of Representatives. Call your Representative - the AIA is held up due to a clash between two personalities (surprise, politicians are fighting with each other.) That's your window to talk to your Representative.
And then I talk about what we can do to fix that. If your Rep won't take action, encourage him/her to support a procedural change at the USPTO. And a link to the USPTO call for comments on streamlining the patent re-examination process, which is another way "in" to fix things.
By the way, "First to File" is part of the America Invents Act.
And yes, "First to File" is really stupid. Fortunately, many Representatives (who are about to vote on AIA) also think "First to File" is a Bad Idea. But they need to hear from their constituents, or they won't fight it. And Reps do listen to their voters, and are especially open when they're about to vote on that topic.
So does that convince you to contact your Representative about the AIA?
Hey, if you can get your Senator or Representative to pay attention to you by posting a video on YouTube, then go with it.
But I'm just telling you what we know politicians will listen to. And right now, the best way to get a politician's attention is to contact them through traditional means. And yes, writing letters or calling their office (or if you happen to live nearby to an office, visiting them) is something they listen to.
That's a great example, and it shows why we (as a slashdot community) need to contact our Senators and Representatives now about software patent reform! Especially the Representatives, since that's where the America Invents Act currently is up for vote.
My advice: if they aren't willing to take action now (because AIA is about to go for vote, so they don't want to change it) ask them to support a procedural change with the USPTO. See my other post on that. If the AIA passes, the USPTO is supposed to propose new rules and guidelines for review, etc - and review is our next opportunity to fix software patents. Community Review (where the USPTO can proactively poll other industry experts if a software patent application seems "new" or if it's "obvious") is one idea.
The key point, though, is that your Representative or Senator knows his/her constituents are paying attention to software patents. When they know the voters at home care about it, the politicians start to care about it.
But in general, if you live in Minnesota, New York, Rhode Island, Connecticut, Oklahoma, Utah, or South Carolina, you need to talk to your Senator's office about technology issues. Why? Because your Senator is on the Senate Subcommittee on Privacy, Technology, and the Law. Technology is a subject your Senator is very sensitive to right now.
Yes, patents are often written to be overly broad. Sometimes that's a hedge against a later change in technology, so the patent still is applicable in some way. Other times, it's just to get the patent accepted - if it sounds hard, it must be "new", right?
Richard Stallman wrote a great article about that once, about how they intentionally write these software patent applications to be obscure. I don't see it on my blog, so it must be queued for next week (I post one item a day.) Check back next week.
But on the flight planning patent - RunwayFinder was a free web site run by a guy out of his home. But FlightPrep sued, claiming infringement on their patent. A big company against one guy... not surprised he shut down, rather than lose his home in an expensive lawsuit.
No... no they're not.
They are interested in how much money they can get from their campaign "donors" to vote one way or the other.
I call BS on that one. Have you actually talked to your Congressperson? They do want to hear from you.
Maybe I'm lucky. I live in Minnesota, so I have Senator Al Franken: privacy, net neutrality. I actually met him a few times, which is what got me interested in doing something about software patent reform. Al made a great comment to me: "It's your job (constituent) to tell me what's important, and my job (Senator) to go do something about that in Washington - but first you need to let me know what's important."
And true to form, when I contacted his office, they listened to me. At my first contact, I spoke with the office's state director. Then I got to meet the constituent affairs person. That led to a conversation with the office's lead counsel on patent issues, and who works with Al on the Senate Subcommittee on Privacy, Technology and the Law. Everyone was very helpful, and very engaged with what I had to say. His office is the one that pointed out the USPTO RFC to me - I had missed it. (USPTO web site is hard to navigate.)
Don't be defeatist with your "They are interested in how much money they can get from donors" attitude, and do something about it. On Slashdot, we've been bitching about software patent reform for years (and I have a low UID). Finally, now we have a window of opportunity. Don't lose it!
I'm afraid it's not so simple. There are now many companies that have massively invested in patents, either to sue other companies or protect themselves against other patent lawsuits. They certainly don't want to see all this investment lost, although it would be net benefit for everybody involved, including them.
Getting your congressmen to view this point of view instead of the lobbyists that will try the best to protect the patents of the companies they work for is the hardest part.
When I spoke with my Senator's office, and (later) with my Representative's office, they both talked about business and how business doesn't want software patent reform. They get this impression by talking to lobbyists, who are presenting one side of the store. But point out that this is costing businesses a lot of money in patent defense, and that some companies have come out asking for software patent reform, and the politicians do listen. When even a company like Google has to announce they are buying a patent portfolio just to use it in defense...
The RFC by the USPTO is limited in scope to restructuring the re-exam process for increased efficiency, quality, and throughput. Comments on this process will need to be framed by the current statute and case law built on the statute, because the USPTO cannot change the statute by itself. Instead, this is talking about changing internal procedure as well as possibly changing the regulations (37 CFR).
Correct, and as pointed out in TFA:
The USPTO seems open to considering this issue, and it is inviting public comments on a proposed rule to streamline patent reexamination proceedings (although you would need to file by June 29, 2011). See Docket No. PTO-P-2011-0018. As you probably know, the patent reexamination process allows a third party or an inventor to have a patent reexamined by a patent examiner to verify that the subject matter it claims is patentable. During patent reexaminations, trial proceedings may be put on hold if a judge agrees to wait for the outcome of the reexamination.
Streamlining patent reexamination proceedings could help in software patent litigation by offering a quicker and more cost effective option for invalidating software patents awarded for obvious methods. Reexaminations have been increasing steadily in recent years, and claims in almost 75% of reexaminations have been either amended or canceled - whereas in courtrooms the majority of claims are decided in favor of the plaintiff patent holders.
(emphasis mine) (TFA is mine too, actually)
Maybe I should have made it clearer that I'm advocating two separate actions here:
Contact your Representative and/or Senator about the America Invents Act, and talk to them about adding software patent reform.
Respond to the USPTO's RFC to recommend streamlining the reexamination process. This isn't the ideal solution, but if the AIA can't get amended to include real software patent reform, then a procedural change with the USPTO can at least mitigate the damage.
And when you don't want to patent something you developed.... how do you keep someone else from prevent you from your own work with this shit about dumping inventor rights over first to file... Anyone want to go into the patent troll business?
(emphasis mine)
And at least in my case, when I spoke to my Representative's office, they "got it" that "first to file" was a bad idea, and would lead to big problems later. I got the impression that "first to file" was (partly) the reason the America Invents Act has been held up for a vote. The Reps are actually arguing over that.
Slashdot Mirror
Still being developed.... Just search for FreeDOS and then shake your head in disgust.....
Sorry that you aren't as enthusiastic about it as we are.
Yes, we're still working on FreeDOS. In fact, if you visit our web site you'll see that we are currently working on the FreeDOS 1.1 distribution. We're almost there! After that is out, we'll start the discussion for what FreeDOS "2.0" should be, what a modern DOS should look like in 2011.
So yes, we are still doing some work there.
A recent load of FreeDOS in a VM worked great. The larger download came with tons of cool software too, but so far Tetris is about the only thing easy to identify from the DOS filename. Sigh... (everything was identified with descriptions when installed, but we old fossils can't remember much stuff like that an hour later)
And you may be interested to know that FreeDOS is still being developed. We're working on a FreeDOS 1.1 distribution (mostly an update to the 1.0 distribution, plus a few noticeable changes.) We are discussing an August release. After that, we will start planning the "2.0" distribution, which I hope will see a "modernization" of what a DOS system should look like in 2011.
8 shows/month is a lot of TV? That's obviously a bit more than 1/day. You watch VASTLY less TV than others do.
I refer you to earlier in my comment, where I noted that we also watch movies and past seasons of TV via Netflix. So 8 shows of current TV is a lot for us, because we're also watching other stuff.
That said, we probably do watch less TV than most people. I think we watch 2 hours a night, maybe 3. The rest of the time we talk to one another.
I'm also a happy Netflix customer, and will remain so - as long as the math works out. For me, it's a math problem: We dropped cable TV a year ago, subscribed to Netflix, and use Amazon Instant Video for current shows.
The math:
Cable TV in my area ... about $80 per month, for the channels I'd want to watch.
Netflix (new price) ... $16 per month. We watch movies and catch up on some TV series (that we didn't watch the first time around) using Netflix. Streaming is great for shows and some movies, but they don't have everything available on streaming, so the "DVD + streaming" plan is a must-have for us.
That leaves $64 per month to spend on Amazon, before we break even with cable TV.
TV on Amazon ... $2 per episode. Assume a weekly show gives 4 episodes per month, so $8 per month per show. That works out to 8 shows per month until we break even with the cost of cable TV. That's a lot of TV, and we just don't watch that much TV.
Not a bad idea. I'll put it on my Bad Patents blog.
I've said this before on slashdot, and I'll say it again here: the problem with software patents will not go away unless people contact their lawmakers and demand change in the patent system. Especially if you live in Minnesota, New York, Rhode Island, Connecticut, Oklahoma, Utah, or South Carolina. Because if so, your senator sits on a very important committee: U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary Subcommittee on Privacy, Technology and the Law. But no matter what state you are in, your senator or representative does listen to constituents who contact them, moreso when you call or visit. Letters do work, too, but admittedly it's less effective than meeting in person, or a phone call. (If you do write, make it handwritten - they pay attention to the effort.)
If we can get several of these senators to understand how "software" patents are stifling innovation of American technology companies, how US companies are spending so much time and money fighting "software" patents when those resources could go to R&D, then the subcommittee can take action. Contact your senator's office, and voice your concerns over "software" patents. Note that you don't actually have to speak with your senator - ask to speak with the staffer who usually deals with technology issues. An alternate contact might be their State Director.
Ultimately, changing how the USPTO considers "software" patents will require a change in law. The right place for this to start is with your congressperson. Remember: it's the job of your senator or US representative to listen to you and bring your concerns to the floor. All it takes is a phone call.
But I know it's oh-so-trendy for people to say "by congresscritters only listen to cash in their pocket" (these people are giving up) and I expect the inevitable followup.
> In short, misleading title is misleading.
And old meme is old.
Skip ahead to about 1:52 in the video. What's the programming language? Tell me that's not BASIC...
I hope everyone responded to the USPTO's call for comments or contacted your Senator and US Representative about patent reform. Because that's the only way the US patent system is going to get fixed.
Your congresscritter really does want to hear from you. It's your job to contact them, and ask them to reform software patents. Seriously, call their office, write them a letter (handwritten carries the most impact, but typed will do), or visit them in their office. Have some examples handy, like this one. I've been discussing software patents with Sen. Franken's office for a while now, so if you don't have a particular suggestion to offer, ask your Senator to see what Sen. Franken is up to. I'm not kidding, they do listen to comments like that.
When I spoke with my Senator's office and my Representative's office, they both talked how business doesn't want software patent reform. They get this impression by talking to lobbyists, who are presenting one side of the story. But when even a company like Google looks to buy a patent portfolio just to use it in defense ... they start to pay attention.
Now we're seeing the small developer - possibly the "next generation" innovator - leaving the market because of software patents. The article talks mostly about non-US developers, but there's a mention of small US-based devs too. And it won't be too long before we hear about how bigger US developers are dropping out over patents. Or even a major name in Free/Open Source Software.
On Slashdot, we've been bitching about software patent reform for years (and I have a low UID). Let's do something! Call or write today! It only takes 5 minutes to get someone on the phone, and get your opinion out there.
>> Do anything...anything!...where you're producing or growing rather than just consuming.
> Then what should one do to unwind after a day of producing?
Speaking for myself, I'm not a big fan of the Big Blue Room with the Yellow Face (it burns us!) But we'll do walks, or whatever, and that's outside. When we don't want to do stuff outside, and don't want to watch a movie or television, there's also video games.
> Until you get into the kinds of shows that Netflix, Amazon, and PSN just can't provide, such as Monday Night Football or The Rachel Maddow Show. Or have they picked up news and sports lately?
I don't watch sports, neither does my wife, so I don't really know where to point you for sports. I think there's an option for that somewhere though, maybe even on PSN or Amazon. I just don't know.
As for news: why would you watch news on television? I stay current on news by reading news web sites. There are a few US sites I use regularly, plus Google News for "trending news", and BBC for a "foreign" perspective.
For me, it's a math problem. I moved a year ago, and we decided to drop cable TV. Instead, we subscribed to Netflix, and regularly use Amazon Instant Video and PlayStation Network.
Look at it this way: Looking at the cost of cable TV (at our old house, but it's about the same here) it was about $80 per month.
But without cable TV, we're watching (mostly) the same shows from Amazon and PSN for $2 per episode. We watch movies and catch up on series (that we didn't watch the first time around) using Netflix. Streaming is great for shows and some movies, but they don't have everything available on streaming, so DVDs are a must-have for us.
Now the cost of Netflix is $16 per month. That's $64 remaining per month to spend on Amazon and PSN. Assuming 4 episodes per month of a current show, we're spending $8 per month per show on Amazon or PSN. That works out to 8 shows per month until we break even with the cost of cable TV. And that's a lot of TV, we just don't watch that much TV.
So at our house, we looked at the price increase as a measure of how that impacts our Amazon and PSN viewership. And so far, we're not unhappy with the price increase. Still less expensive to use Netflix + Amazon + PSN, rather than cable TV.
Hell yeah but they answered "This is an American thing, stupid geek, you are living in Europe."
I know you are joking (or trolling) but you should know that several EU countries are considering changing their patent system to be more like the US. So if you live in the EU, you should be concerned about what's happening to the US patent system, because you might be next.
Hi. I submitted the story.
Did you bother to read the blog I linked to? I know this is Slashdot, but it helps if you RTFA. I know the America Invents Act doesn't do anything about software patents. From the linked blog:
And then I talk about what we can do to fix that. If your Rep won't take action, encourage him/her to support a procedural change at the USPTO. And a link to the USPTO call for comments on streamlining the patent re-examination process, which is another way "in" to fix things.
Thanks for the post! If I had mod points, I'd give them to you.
By the way, "First to File" is part of the America Invents Act.
And yes, "First to File" is really stupid. Fortunately, many Representatives (who are about to vote on AIA) also think "First to File" is a Bad Idea. But they need to hear from their constituents, or they won't fight it. And Reps do listen to their voters, and are especially open when they're about to vote on that topic.
So does that convince you to contact your Representative about the AIA?
Hey, if you can get your Senator or Representative to pay attention to you by posting a video on YouTube, then go with it.
But I'm just telling you what we know politicians will listen to. And right now, the best way to get a politician's attention is to contact them through traditional means. And yes, writing letters or calling their office (or if you happen to live nearby to an office, visiting them) is something they listen to.
That's a great example, and it shows why we (as a slashdot community) need to contact our Senators and Representatives now about software patent reform! Especially the Representatives, since that's where the America Invents Act currently is up for vote.
My advice: if they aren't willing to take action now (because AIA is about to go for vote, so they don't want to change it) ask them to support a procedural change with the USPTO. See my other post on that. If the AIA passes, the USPTO is supposed to propose new rules and guidelines for review, etc - and review is our next opportunity to fix software patents. Community Review (where the USPTO can proactively poll other industry experts if a software patent application seems "new" or if it's "obvious") is one idea.
The key point, though, is that your Representative or Senator knows his/her constituents are paying attention to software patents. When they know the voters at home care about it, the politicians start to care about it.
But in general, if you live in Minnesota, New York, Rhode Island, Connecticut, Oklahoma, Utah, or South Carolina, you need to talk to your Senator's office about technology issues. Why? Because your Senator is on the Senate Subcommittee on Privacy, Technology, and the Law. Technology is a subject your Senator is very sensitive to right now.
I'm VERY interested in hearing why the American Medical Association and IEEE are against the bill. Perhaps someone can enlighten me?
The "First to File" is a major issue for a lot of folks. I believe this is true for IEEE - not sure about AMA, but I'd hazard a "yes" on that too.
If you have a correction, please leave it in the comments.
Yes, patents are often written to be overly broad. Sometimes that's a hedge against a later change in technology, so the patent still is applicable in some way. Other times, it's just to get the patent accepted - if it sounds hard, it must be "new", right?
Richard Stallman wrote a great article about that once, about how they intentionally write these software patent applications to be obscure. I don't see it on my blog, so it must be queued for next week (I post one item a day.) Check back next week.
But on the flight planning patent - RunwayFinder was a free web site run by a guy out of his home. But FlightPrep sued, claiming infringement on their patent. A big company against one guy ... not surprised he shut down, rather than lose his home in an expensive lawsuit.
No... no they're not. They are interested in how much money they can get from their campaign "donors" to vote one way or the other.
I call BS on that one. Have you actually talked to your Congressperson? They do want to hear from you.
Maybe I'm lucky. I live in Minnesota, so I have Senator Al Franken: privacy, net neutrality. I actually met him a few times, which is what got me interested in doing something about software patent reform. Al made a great comment to me: "It's your job (constituent) to tell me what's important, and my job (Senator) to go do something about that in Washington - but first you need to let me know what's important."
And true to form, when I contacted his office, they listened to me. At my first contact, I spoke with the office's state director. Then I got to meet the constituent affairs person. That led to a conversation with the office's lead counsel on patent issues, and who works with Al on the Senate Subcommittee on Privacy, Technology and the Law. Everyone was very helpful, and very engaged with what I had to say. His office is the one that pointed out the USPTO RFC to me - I had missed it. (USPTO web site is hard to navigate.)
Don't be defeatist with your "They are interested in how much money they can get from donors" attitude, and do something about it. On Slashdot, we've been bitching about software patent reform for years (and I have a low UID). Finally, now we have a window of opportunity. Don't lose it!
I'm afraid it's not so simple. There are now many companies that have massively invested in patents, either to sue other companies or protect themselves against other patent lawsuits. They certainly don't want to see all this investment lost, although it would be net benefit for everybody involved, including them. Getting your congressmen to view this point of view instead of the lobbyists that will try the best to protect the patents of the companies they work for is the hardest part.
When I spoke with my Senator's office, and (later) with my Representative's office, they both talked about business and how business doesn't want software patent reform. They get this impression by talking to lobbyists, who are presenting one side of the store. But point out that this is costing businesses a lot of money in patent defense, and that some companies have come out asking for software patent reform, and the politicians do listen. When even a company like Google has to announce they are buying a patent portfolio just to use it in defense ...
The RFC by the USPTO is limited in scope to restructuring the re-exam process for increased efficiency, quality, and throughput. Comments on this process will need to be framed by the current statute and case law built on the statute, because the USPTO cannot change the statute by itself. Instead, this is talking about changing internal procedure as well as possibly changing the regulations (37 CFR).
Correct, and as pointed out in TFA:
(emphasis mine) (TFA is mine too, actually)
Maybe I should have made it clearer that I'm advocating two separate actions here:
And when you don't want to patent something you developed.... how do you keep someone else from prevent you from your own work with this shit about dumping inventor rights over first to file... Anyone want to go into the patent troll business?
(emphasis mine)
And at least in my case, when I spoke to my Representative's office, they "got it" that "first to file" was a bad idea, and would lead to big problems later. I got the impression that "first to file" was (partly) the reason the America Invents Act has been held up for a vote. The Reps are actually arguing over that.