Rather Than Pressuring The ITC Over Key Patent Cases, Congress Should Fix A Broken Patent System

from the stop-the-favoritism,-fix-the-problem dept

Tue, Sep 18th 2012 7:59pm — Mike Masnick

For years we've talked about how many patent holders these days have two cracks at anyone they accuse of infringing: through the courts and then separately through the ITC, which can issue an injunction (but not monetary awards) that block a product made elsewhere from entering the US. The ITC doesn't have to follow the same rules as the courts. So, for example, it doesn't need to abide by specific Supreme Court precedent, which can lead to some wacky outcomes. But, really, it's just one more example of a broken patent system.

It's interesting to see that in a high profile case that the ITC is handling, between Intel and X2Y Attentuators LLC -- which describes itself as "an intellectual property company" -- various members of Congress are so worried about the possibility of an injunction issued against Intel, that they've specifically sent a letter to the ITC urging it to "consider the broader public interest" before making a decision. Two letters were sent -- one from the two Senators and all five House reps from Oregon, and another from the two Senators and all eight House reps from Arizona -- telling the ITC that a ruling against Intel would have a "detrimental effect" on the workforce and such an injunction could "discourage" US production and "could do more harm than good with respect to the public interest."

While they're right, this does seem like blatant pandering to constituents. Intel has very large presences in both states (16,000 employees in Oregon and 11,000 in Arizona). However, as the National Law Journal article linked above notes, this is becoming pretty standard, any time a large tech company faces an injunction from the ITC. Its Congressional reps get together and send the ITC a letter. While I agree that these injunctions can do serious harm and the economy, and innovation is much better without the ITC issuing them, it's troubling to me that these elected officials are resorting to pressuring the ITC, rather than doing what they should: recognizing this is just one small symptom of a truly broken patent system. Instead of trying to pressure that one symptom, why not focus on actually fixing the problems of the patent system? If they want a starting point, we've got some ideas.

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: itc, patents
Companies: intel, x2y attentuators

16 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

TtfnJohn (profile), 18 Sep 2012 @ 9:52pm

The reality is that it's easier and offends fewer vested interests than tackling the entire patent system. Keeping in mind that the courts are a significant part of the reason it's broken.

That said if there's good reason to pressure the ITC over one (some) patents there's an even better reason to press for going over the entire broken system.

Judge Posner had some valid points about actually cutting the number and type of "inventions" qualifying for patent protection down. You had some good responses.

I'd also point to the term of patents these days. Cutting it in half to 10 years even in Pharma wouldn't hurt much and limiting renewals would hurt even less.

As has been pointed out by both you and Judge Posner is that patent protection is possible in the tech sector even if it is largely prior art, well known and practised or considered obvious by practitioners. And there it hangs till it gets challenged and invalidated or worked around.

And I'm just barely beginning. Like telling patent trolls that unless they're actually MAKING what the patent covers they're gonna lose it in short order and it'll go into the public domain.

And more.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Sep 2012 @ 9:58pm

US Patent Cow or The Tech Tax
The government gets paid for patents. Then they get paid a second time to review the same patents. A lot of the money from this is not used to improve the patent office but pulled into the general fund to pay other government expenses. So congress is in no hurry to kill this profit center. Its a tax that their constituents don't see, much less complain about.

The burden for dealing with the fallout from this is not under either the congressional or executive branches of government. Its in the judicial. So no one gets held responsible for it.

As for the CAFC, they are protecting their jobs. They don't want to narrowly define patents, they want it as broad as possible to keep the case load up so their jobs are justified.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Ed C., 19 Sep 2012 @ 6:53am
  
  Re: US Patent Cow or The Tech Tax
  Thank you! The more people get this, the better chance we have of getting real reform.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
That One Guy (profile), 18 Sep 2012 @ 10:13pm

You know, given the increasing blatancy of the corruption of the government, I'm rather surprised they were so mild in their 'suggestions', instead of just coming out and saying 'Find in favor of Intel, or people will get laid off and we won't get re-elected. Should that happen, we will most certainly not be the only people losing our jobs.'
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
ECA (profile), 18 Sep 2012 @ 10:49pm

LETS SEE..
So, we are trying to make laws (trade agreements) against other countries and Copyrights(drugs being copied and used over seas) then we are getting PISSY, that another country is trying to sue one of our bigger industries??
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Ed C., 19 Sep 2012 @ 6:57am
  
  Re: LETS SEE..
  It's kind of like the couple who rails against "guy rights", but then wants exemptions for their son.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Sep 2012 @ 1:18am

'why not focus on actually fixing the problems of the patent system'

dont be stupid! that would mean having to actually use their brains instead of using their political weight to achieve an end result, and we all know how hard that would be!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Tom Anderson, 19 Sep 2012 @ 2:25am

The ITC should follow precedent of law. That's just broken...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Sep 2012 @ 3:27am

The political perspective on patents is:
Protecting our industry good, protecting foreign industry bad
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ed C., 19 Sep 2012 @ 7:01am

I doubt that the injunction will be granted, as Intel has a lot of clout, but I actually hope it does. Yes, this will hurt a lot of people, but a junky usually doesn't come clean until he hits bottom.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Pixelation, 19 Sep 2012 @ 7:21am

List
Perhaps it's time to start a list of companies that are patent trolls. Let's get our Congress critters to have a look see.

#1. X2Y

#2. Intellectual Ventures
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Harry, 16 Oct 2012 @ 7:25pm
  
  Re: List
  If you do the research x2y is not a troll. They offered this technology 10years ago to intel.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
gorehound (profile), 19 Sep 2012 @ 7:31am

We have a Do-Nothing Congress who are receiving at the very least 100's of millions of dollars in Big Money.
They will not fix the Broken Patent System.I am not optimistic on them actually making a Fair and Useful Patent System the actually supports US Innovative Technologies.
I have an almost Zero Approval of our present Political System.
Washington is a Cancer !
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
DCX2, 19 Sep 2012 @ 9:25am

More details on the patents?
I would like to hear more details on the patents in question, rather than just accusations of X2Y being a patent troll. I say this because I have personally used X2Y capacitors in one of my designs. It's a very special type of capacitor that is designed from the ground up to have the smallest inductance possible, which is important for a bypass capacitor.

I'm not sure if the patents in question deal with those capacitors, or if it is even the same company, but doing some googling suggests X2Y Attenuators deals with passive components like capacitors. Can we get some verification that they are actually a patent troll?

I say this because X2Y capacitors are real. Here's a link to a presentation about X2Y capacitors and how they improve the power distribution network of a PCB with an FPGA.

http://johansondielectrics.com/pdfs/x2y_live_FPGA.pdf

Here's a link to DigiKey, where you can buy X2Y caps right now.

http://www.digikey.com/product-detail/en/160X41W105MV4E/709-1108-2-ND/1843856

This capacitor is not one of your standard "on the internet" or "on a cell phone" type things. This is the kind of stuff that actually deserves patent protection, in my opinion.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 20 Sep 2012 @ 12:03am
  
  Re: More details on the patents?
  No, it does not. Bypass capacitors have been standard in electronics for many decades. Reducing stray inductance in a capacitor, has been a standard technique in capacitor manufacture, likewise for many decades. A lot of stuff in electronics has been around for a very long time. Just saying, "Ooh, electronics, high tech, must be new and patented!" will lead you into error nearly every time.
  
  Chances are, X2Y's patents are junk, just like lots of patents.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Willlton, 20 Sep 2012 @ 7:43am
    
    Re: Re: More details on the patents?
    "Chances are, X2Y's patents are junk, just like lots of patents."
    
    Guessing does not qualify as analysis.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]