EFF Worried About Patent Reform Re-Exam Process
from the for-good-reason dept
While I'm obviously a strong believer in the idea that our patent system is fundamentally broken, I've also made it clear that the current plans for patent reform have a lot of problems. While it will fix a few things, it will also make other parts much worse, and will lead to even more abuse of the system. It's "reform" that's designed to simply patch a few things that are seen as problems, rather than recognizing the core, fundamental problems with the system -- and, thus, it will do little to help (and could hurt). The EFF, which supports this patent legislation generally, is complaining about another potential problem with the current reform package. As written, the patent reform effort would make it much more difficult for third parties to contest questionable patents in some cases. Basically, rather than allowing them to request a full patent re-exam, it will force third parties to use the newly created post-grant review system, which has some limitations. For example, it would mean that groups like the EFF would need to contest a patent within 12 months of it being issued. That's a problem, because it often doesn't become clear how problematic a patent is until much later. In fact, if this policy were in place, it would have made the EFF's patent busting project impossible. From the very start of the patent system, it was supposed to only be used in the rarest of circumstances. With that in mind, it makes sense to make the process for getting rid of bad, unnecessary and dangerous patents as easy as possible. It's unfortunate that the system has morphed into the exact opposite.![Hide This Hide this](https://ii.techdirt.com/s/t/i/topclose.png)
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: eff, patent reform, patent review, patents, re-exams
Companies: eff
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Patent Everything.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Patent Nothing
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I'll be rich
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Prior art
Seriously, some enterprising patent attorney or maybe the EFF should write this up a little better (more legal and less clear) and attempt to patent it. Wouldn't that be a hoot if they succeeded.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I love patents.
http://www.american.com/archive/2008/january-february-magazine-contents/patents-pending
[ link to this | view in chronology ]