Congressional Research Service Takes On The Question Of Patent Trolls
from the good-research dept
As we've discussed in the past, the Congressional Research Service (CRS) produces tons of research for Congress -- much of which never sees the light of day. In general, CRS is considered extremely competent and not driven by political and partisan food fights. Reports that come out of CRS usually seem to be careful and thorough. It's just that we rarely get to see them because, even though they're technically in the public domain, they're not automatically released to the public.Some do get out, however, and the Secrecy News blog has a few recent reports, all of which are fairly interesting, including one on Presidential claims of executive privilege (pdf). However, for folks around here, the one that may be even more interesting is CRS's exploration of patent trolls (pdf and embedded below), the problems they create, and some possible ways to deal with the problem.
In typical CRS fashion, the report is pretty straightforward, laying out the arguments in a fairly objective way, without taking any particular sides. Even so, it does do a pretty good job of objectively portraying some of the problems with patent trolls, which the report (mostly) refers to under the more diplomatic term "Patent Assertion Entities" (PAE) -- though, it does discuss the "patent troll" term a few times. The report makes repeated references to an awful lot of the excellent research that's been done in the past few years on the subject, including from Bessen & Meurer, Mark Lemley and Colleen Chien. It also relies heavily on the excellent FTC report on the problem of patent trolls, which we discussed last year.
In terms of what to do about the harm caused by patent trolls (and the report notes both potential beneficial aspects and negative ones), the report discussed the recently introduced SHIELD Act, which would aim to put an increased legal burden on trolls who sue indiscriminately against parties who clearly are not violating the patents in question. However, it also suggests a few other possible methods of reform, including carving out different rules for tech patents (though, it admits that might run afoul of some international trade agreements), better notice (i.e., better clarity on the "boundaries" of patents) and my favorite: figuring out ways to reduce the overall "leverage, hold-up and settlement pressure" that leads to patent trolls regularly getting their way, even when the patent is bogus.
All in all, it's a worthwhile read, and at the very least a useful index of some important research in the field.
Also, randomly, I'm pretty sure (though not positive) that I used to hang out with the author of the report back in college, though I lost touch with him many years ago. Small world.
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: congressional research service, pae, patent assertion entities, patent trolls, patents
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Though I am worried that, with altering tech patents affecting trade agreements, congress will be resistant to changing things on these grounds, this definitely seems like it could lead to more positive patent reform.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What might solutions for the pressure look like?
Current system makes it most profitable to throw it all at the wall and see what sticks. We need to change the incentive structure.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
would it be better if it said 'even when the CLAIM is bogus'?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Great
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
ZOMG MIKES BEEN SETTING UP OTHER GOOGLE SHILLS JUST WAITING TO POUNCE ALL THIS TIME!!!!!!!!
/s
Someone had to do it, why not me?
Now the grownups can talk.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Misleading Headline
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
With the juxtaposition of your profile name, That Anonymous Coward, makes more funny ^_^
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
I guess its less fun for them if someone else gets the jump on them, then there isn't a 10 page whine session about how Mike won't answer questions, is a shill, etc etc etc...
Sometimes to beat the troll, one must troll first
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Grownup time...
It would be nice for people to see the balanced reports on these topics that Congresscritters often decide to ignore in favor of irrational reactionary or quid pro quo satisfying law making.
Finding balance in anything these days is rare, and more is the pity to society as a whole.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
P>S> Die trolls.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
But, but .. pirates!!!1111
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I cannot remember what they were ignored about except that it had a lot of DNC people in congress who were buying into green energy. Whenever a some of the outlandish claims these people made were called into question , the CRS data proving their theories wrong was totally ignored.
In fact if I recall, being a part of the CRS science division was considdered at the time to be one of Pop-Sci's worst jobs in science.
I think that because of the public backlash against SOPA and PIPA, the CRS can now have their say in a very election-oriented congress.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Having said that, I left when the Repubs took over and "comity" was replaced with "we're gonna do this and F*CK YOU for suggesting otherwise." (an actual quote from the staff director of a prominent repub congressman). It's allll been downhill since then.
/sidenote
I have great respect for the CRS' work. 'tween them and the GAO, you can usually get a pretty fair analysis of just about anything.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Patent Abolition
Where can the people find a politician who will stand up for what is right instead of selling out to special interests, such as the patent bar?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Patent Abuse
This patent law is making things difficult for business and innovation.Someone will start claiming patents for HTML and we shall all be required to put our websites down.Stop It Now
This is just not right !
[ link to this | view in chronology ]