Government // Leadership
News
2/21/2014
10:30 AM
Connect Directly
RSS
E-Mail

White House Targets Patent Trolls

Obama administration reports progress, announces three new executive actions, to promote patent reform.

Image courtesy of Flickr - Libby Levi for OpenSource.com
Image courtesy of Flickr - Libby Levi for OpenSource.com

Comment  | 
Print  | 
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Page 1 / 2   >   >>
WKash
50%
50%
WKash,
User Rank: Author
2/24/2014 | 7:42:17 PM
Re: There is no protect for little guys
Tom, I agree, the idea that tweaks in software code deserve to be patent protected has created a nightmarish situation for patent examiners.
AryehF891
50%
50%
AryehF891,
User Rank: Apprentice
2/23/2014 | 8:21:11 PM
Re: make money
Also keep in mind that many business school programs teach the idea that patents are offensive weapons to among other things kill competition.  A case in point a friend of a friend has a chip design (and prototyped) that puts 1,000 64 bit cores (not x86 commpatible) on one die (roughtly the same that Intel and AMD are doing and getting 4 or 6 cores).   That patent was blocked because Inetl had somehow patented the idea of multicoe CPU's (despite doing nothing to enforce it against AMD).   This friend of a friend was forced out of business before he even got going (despite the processors where never meant to power a PC or a server)
danielcawrey
50%
50%
danielcawrey,
User Rank: Ninja
2/22/2014 | 9:04:30 PM
Re: Crowdsourcking patents is a horrible idea
I think that everyone is pretty much tired of patent trolling. It's a real problem that stifles innovation. It also forces technology companies to fork over money for technology that a troll isn't even going to turn into a business idea. Those costs ultimately trickle down into what customers must pay for a service, so I'm all for some reform. 
AryehF891
50%
50%
AryehF891,
User Rank: Apprentice
2/21/2014 | 7:19:56 PM
Re: There is no protect for little guys
Being an inventor of about 15 different ideas that where/are patentable but being due to personal circumstances unable to fit in well with the silicon valley crowd lack the contacts needed to get a VC interested in our stuff unless we have at least 4 or 5 the patents actually in hand (or in final filing stages) [far beyond our resources without a $100+k investment for the legal stuff alone and then to justify that total investment would need to be $1+M for an initial target market size of <$100M.   This is the reason we are going with the open source enabled business model (i.e. we sell stuff enabled by our open source work).   See http://www.petitecloud.org/fosok.jsp for more info.

 

The above leads to an ineterestinig modification to the current WH purposal which is widen and deepen the crowd sourcing requirement for small inventors (<10 patents/year... "corporate" inventors are assumed to know what they are doing and will be fined if caught filinig junk patents).   Namely the 1 year buffer I suggested between demo/publication and the end of protection should be used (and required to a limited extent) to allow the iventor to get community feedback on their invention to a) strengthing their claims, b) improve the marketability of the idea and c) give the idea the protection it needs to get VC's interested (note most VC's are not inieterested if you have fewer then 2 or 3 patentable ideas).

 

Under the above the total cost of the 15 patents could be $15k which makes the total investment needed [including the marketing and R&D] be near $150k.   This now brings it witin the range of a highend angel investor or investor group.
WKash
100%
0%
WKash,
User Rank: Author
2/21/2014 | 5:58:45 PM
Re: There is no protect for little guys
Thanks for sharing your observations here.  We'll keep these in mind as we continue to cover this.
AryehF891
50%
50%
AryehF891,
User Rank: Apprentice
2/21/2014 | 5:53:20 PM
Re: There is no protect for little guys
That sites is completely useless for most inventors I think it is all about what to do if some abusive patent holder starts harrsing you and not how to protect your own ideas.
AryehF891
50%
50%
AryehF891,
User Rank: Apprentice
2/21/2014 | 5:37:42 PM
Re: There is no protect for little guys
Agreed the law (paraphrased [I am *NOT* an attorney]) says:

 

1. The idea most be novel and non-obvious

2. It must be repeatable (as described) by any one well versted in "the art"

3. Pure Ideas and/or discoveries about nature are *NOT* patentable

 

Under the above rules I would argue that:

 

1. Design patents be elimianated as a catagory (GMA will hate this one as will all the fadish "patent my business model" tricks)

2. Reclassife math/computer science as being a "physical" science in the sense it does control/respond to the real world

3. Require a public demostration of a working prototype and/or scholarly journel publication as being sufficent proof of being novel and non-obvious (doing either one puts a 1 year block on anyone filing for a patent but the author/demostrator)
4. Claims be limited to what can be directly observed as a result of the described process

5. The inventor's attorney must be a subject field expert (for example our attorney also has a BA in CS... but method of knowledge aquistion not be dictated) and anything that fails the novel and non-obvious test is usable as cause for action by the Bar and/or the PTO against the attorney.

 

<Added after replies made>

 

6. The subject matter/claims of the patent must not contain classified and/or other restricted knowledge

7. The peroid of exclusive use should be shortened to 5 years (you still have the 17 years of protection) after which anyone one who wants to use the patent can license it for a reasonable fee/commission (universities/goverment agencies [ex. NASA] often just sit on patents doing nothing with them and some cases even effectively blocking their use with insane fees like 1/3 of gross revenue and/or preventing facility members from having commerical ineterests {Univ. of Ca. is one of the worst hear and MIT one of the best}) for the 17 years of protection (maybe even grow it to 20 years)
WKash
50%
50%
WKash,
User Rank: Author
2/21/2014 | 5:04:23 PM
Re: There is no protect for little guys
Thanks for sharing your story. I'm sure you're not alone in experiencing how inventive ideas can get blocked because of overly general patents held by companies w/ deep pockets. 

I'd be interested in your thoiughts on how useful the new "Patent Litigation" toolkit is on  the USPTO site, that I understand is a first for USPTO in helping business with some of these issues.  See http://www.uspto.gov/patents/litigation/index.jsp

 
Thomas Claburn
IW Pick
100%
0%
Thomas Claburn,
User Rank: Author
2/21/2014 | 5:03:47 PM
Re: There is no protect for little guys
Individual inventors with truly novel ideas deserve patent protection. But no one seems willing to address the possibility that much of what is currently patentable should not be patentable at all. The notion that Amazon could patent purchasing an item with a single click is absurd. Business method patents for software should not exist.
AryehF891
50%
50%
AryehF891,
User Rank: Apprentice
2/21/2014 | 4:09:31 PM
Re: There is no protect for little guys
Large companies often purposely over generalize their claims so that they include areas that are not even in the domain of the original patent.   For example the company I worked for in the mid-90's was blocked from a key patent for video compression because some Sony patent for audo enhancement (which required even more data to be sent) managed to claim that a optional component (not present in their "working prototype" [they never publically demostrated this as far we know]) without this the style of video compression we had in mind was impossible [even to this day compression can be improved 5 to 10 times].
Page 1 / 2   >   >>
2014 US Salary Survey: 10 Stats
2014 US Salary Survey: 10 Stats
InformationWeek surveyed 11,662 IT pros across 30 industries about their pay, benefits, job satisfaction, outsourcing, and more. Some of the results will surprise you.
Register for InformationWeek Newsletters
White Papers
Current Issue
InformationWeek Must Reads Oct. 21, 2014
InformationWeek's new Must Reads is a compendium of our best recent coverage of digital strategy. Learn why you should learn to embrace DevOps, how to avoid roadblocks for digital projects, what the five steps to API management are, and more.
Video
Slideshows
Twitter Feed
InformationWeek Radio
Archived InformationWeek Radio
A roundup of the top stories and community news at InformationWeek.com.
Sponsored Live Streaming Video
Everything You've Been Told About Mobility Is Wrong
Attend this video symposium with Sean Wisdom, Global Director of Mobility Solutions, and learn about how you can harness powerful new products to mobilize your business potential.