Patents and patent law have always been very complicated and controversial. The amount spent for legal support to challenge and protect patents is a huge cost of doing business. With the many international agreements, patent law is getting even more complicated across international borders.
As a national and global policy, we should try to do everything possible to encourage new ideas and inventions. The financial protection provided by patents and copyrights does need to be maintained. This Gallegher Intellectual Property Law Site has good history of the problem. However, the business that "patent trolls" do is generally despicable, counter-productive, and does nothing to help the economy, other than enrich the trolls and their lawyers. Legitimate companies are generally willing to negotiate fair and reasonable fees for rights to use patents. I think the US Government does need legislation to put some sort of controls on those trolls. But what is the right answer? Who can we believe? A new version of the "Innovation Act" is now pending in Congress which purports to resolve this problem.
The Electronic Frontier Foundation supports the "Innovation Act" which failed to pass in 2014, and may get voted upon again in 2015. See this link: But the San Diego Union Tribune today published an editorial by Bryan Pate, CEO of EliptiGo, who says that his small business would be ruined if the Innovation Act passed, due to the additional legal costs required to defend his patents. This trial lawyer presents a solid argument at this web page, for why the Innovation Act will only benefit the large corporations and not really help the small innovator. Of course, if patent trolls are stopped, lawyers will generally lose business. Who can we believe? This website appears to explain both sides of the issue Fox Business also tries to explain both sides. . From the corporations that are lining up on both sides of the issue, it appears that the very large businesses have lined up in favor of the "innovation act" and the small businesses are against it. It is hard to figure out who's money is behind it -- see this link: Since now corporations can donate as much money as they want to politicians, I am suspicious that the so-called innovation act will actually benefit the very large businesses and squeeze out the little guy. Based upon only that, I would be suspicious of it and would prefer it not be passed. I've often thought that patent trolls could be stopped if they had to show that they were actively pursuing use of the patent they own. After all, the goal of the patent system is to push patent owners to deploy their idea as fast as possible, before the protection ends. A troll typically never actually uses the patent or even licenses it to anyone in good faith to employ in a design.
The same sort of thing happened with Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA). It was a terrible piece of legislation, but was sponsored and funded by Disney and a few other very big corporations. When the act passed, Disney was able to extend the copyright protection for old books and movies from back when Disney first started so probably made hundreds of millions of dollars from the passage. Meanwhile the act generally screwed the public's rights to fair-use sharing of copyrighted material. I wonder if the innovation act will end up doing the same thing?
I have not yet written to Darryl Issa, my congressman because I'm not sure which way I would want him to vote. It does seem to me that if we want to stop the evil of patent trolls, we have to "raise the bar" for litigation, which, in turn, will raise the costs for someone to litigate to protect their patent. I'd be interested in hearing what others think on this subject.
As a national and global policy, we should try to do everything possible to encourage new ideas and inventions. The financial protection provided by patents and copyrights does need to be maintained. This Gallegher Intellectual Property Law Site has good history of the problem. However, the business that "patent trolls" do is generally despicable, counter-productive, and does nothing to help the economy, other than enrich the trolls and their lawyers. Legitimate companies are generally willing to negotiate fair and reasonable fees for rights to use patents. I think the US Government does need legislation to put some sort of controls on those trolls. But what is the right answer? Who can we believe? A new version of the "Innovation Act" is now pending in Congress which purports to resolve this problem.
The Electronic Frontier Foundation supports the "Innovation Act" which failed to pass in 2014, and may get voted upon again in 2015. See this link: But the San Diego Union Tribune today published an editorial by Bryan Pate, CEO of EliptiGo, who says that his small business would be ruined if the Innovation Act passed, due to the additional legal costs required to defend his patents. This trial lawyer presents a solid argument at this web page, for why the Innovation Act will only benefit the large corporations and not really help the small innovator. Of course, if patent trolls are stopped, lawyers will generally lose business. Who can we believe? This website appears to explain both sides of the issue Fox Business also tries to explain both sides. . From the corporations that are lining up on both sides of the issue, it appears that the very large businesses have lined up in favor of the "innovation act" and the small businesses are against it. It is hard to figure out who's money is behind it -- see this link: Since now corporations can donate as much money as they want to politicians, I am suspicious that the so-called innovation act will actually benefit the very large businesses and squeeze out the little guy. Based upon only that, I would be suspicious of it and would prefer it not be passed. I've often thought that patent trolls could be stopped if they had to show that they were actively pursuing use of the patent they own. After all, the goal of the patent system is to push patent owners to deploy their idea as fast as possible, before the protection ends. A troll typically never actually uses the patent or even licenses it to anyone in good faith to employ in a design.
The same sort of thing happened with Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA). It was a terrible piece of legislation, but was sponsored and funded by Disney and a few other very big corporations. When the act passed, Disney was able to extend the copyright protection for old books and movies from back when Disney first started so probably made hundreds of millions of dollars from the passage. Meanwhile the act generally screwed the public's rights to fair-use sharing of copyrighted material. I wonder if the innovation act will end up doing the same thing?
I have not yet written to Darryl Issa, my congressman because I'm not sure which way I would want him to vote. It does seem to me that if we want to stop the evil of patent trolls, we have to "raise the bar" for litigation, which, in turn, will raise the costs for someone to litigate to protect their patent. I'd be interested in hearing what others think on this subject.
No comments:
Post a Comment