Posted on 09/16/2011 9:22:42 AM PDT by Morpheus2009
(CNN) -- President Barack Obama signed legislation Friday that will overhaul the U.S. patent system for the first time since 1952.
"We have to do everything we can to encourage the entrepreneurial spirit wherever we find it," Obama said at a signing ceremony at a high school in Arlington, Virginia. This measure "cuts away the red tape that slows down our inventors and entrepreneurs."
Obama used the occasion to promote his $447 billion jobs plan, calling patent reform a "part of our (larger) agenda for making us competitive over the long term."
Among other things, the measure, dubbed the America Invents Act, will transition the country to a "first-to-file" system, instead of the current "first-to-invent" approach. Issuing patents to the first person or company to file will help provide clarity in the patent-granting process, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office says. It will also prevent inventors from coming out of the woodwork to challenge pending patents.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
1) Invent or not, America is not about just inventing first. Only a fool would fail to realize how lawsuit and copyright sensitive American life is to realize that America is about being first to file, because the file with a patent office is proof that you came up with it first.
2) The main problem with inventions is not about the process and filing so much as about the resources involved in finally developing the invention. If I used company or some other person's property to produce the product, especially pharmaceutical development, it's a little complicated as to who deserves shares in ownership of the invention. Put in mind that I did not make the invention neccessarily on my own, and because I did use someone else's resources, such a person or organization deserves credit and acknowledgement for making the work possible.
Either way, agree with me or not, let the discussions begin!
Some advice from your friendly Freeper patent attorney:
1. Keep your invention secret until you understand the implications of this law (find a patent attorney to advise you).
2. Document all necessary disclosures of your invention to any suppliers.
3. Plan to file a fast Provisional application (cheap, if you have already done a writeup and some sketches).
4. Be security paranoid. The law makes fertile territory for industrial espionage. All they need to do is to learn of your invention, file before you do, and leave you unable to prove that they learned it from you. This means better employee agreements, and better computer security. Hire consultants.
I can advise on any of this to those who freepmail.
So I am guessing this bill could still leave problematic issues open here, simply saying because the industrial espionage still operates, and encouraging people to come out of the office doesn’t acknowledge the issue.
The House version was much better...the Leahy authored Senate version had “help” from large corporations and ‘vested interests’. The part about the auto review sucks. so, if you are a small time invientor, bring a patent to market, you have to have the $$$ to dfend it against the big guns for 9 months??? Yea, pass the bill so we can see what’s in it. Again.
Thank you!!! Very much appreciate and expert’s opinion and advice on this one.
Thanks.
Does the new law have any implications for those that already have a patent, but have not yet marketed a product using it?
What is being overlooked is that this bill is to give cover to one of Obummers cronies.
Spread the word.
Does the new law have any implications for those that already have a patent, but have not yet marketed a product using it?
Included in the bill is a bailout for a politically connected law firm in Boston.
Thanks!
This should be found unconstitutional. I don’t know who will file the suit, but the Constitution recognizes the rights of “inventors”.
SCOTUS will need to decide whether being the second to think up an invention but first to file makes you an “inventor.” Put another way, can one invention have several separate “inventors”?
I can’t say which way they would rule.
Freeper Patent Attorney:
Could you comment on the below three (3) issues as currently stated on wiki:
1. Opponents of the Bill contend that...venture funding will be diverted to less risky investments. Therefore startups, the primary source of inventions, will be unable to raise funding to commercialize their inventions. Over time, and compounding year on year, the decrease in economic growth and the failure to commercialize innovative, disruptive technologies will accelerate the economic decline of the United States relative to competing nations.
2. Proponents of the Bill argue that revision of both post grant opposition and interference will help US inventors. They point out that a patent that has survived a post-grant review will be stronger than one without. Neither side has put forward a cost-benefit balance showing that the added strength of these patents will compensate for the loss of access to venture capital, though the venture capitalists that have opined on the likely balance have concluded that the post-grant review will reduce access to capital more than it increases patent strength.
3. Opponents have raised the concern that the Law of Unintended Consequences could result in outcomes that cause the USA to lose its leadership position in innovation, particularly as a result of the adverse impact on small companies, who have not been represented in the negotiations leading up to this bill. The complexity of the innovation ecosystem being beyond most legislative bodies’ comprehension argues for small incremental changes that are less likely to cause harm in the manner that the well-intended Sarbanes–Oxley Act did.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/America_Invents_Act
If this has been done away with, the small innovator has been killed.
1. Opponents of the Bill contend that...venture funding will be diverted to less risky investments. Therefore startups, the primary source of inventions, will be unable to raise funding to commercialize their inventions. Over time, and compounding year on year, the decrease in economic growth and the failure to commercialize innovative, disruptive technologies will accelerate the economic decline of the United States relative to competing nations.
Dunno. I don’t understand why this would divert funding. $1000 for a Provisional should secure the start-ups rights initially.
2. Proponents of the Bill argue that revision of both post grant opposition and interference will help US inventors. They point out that a patent that has survived a post-grant review will be stronger than one without. Neither side has put forward a cost-benefit balance showing that the added strength of these patents will compensate for the loss of access to venture capital, though the venture capitalists that have opined on the likely balance have concluded that the post-grant review will reduce access to capital more than it increases patent strength.
Any post-grant proceeding will be EXPENSIVE. Less than litigation, but more than getting the patent.
3. Opponents have raised the concern that the Law of Unintended Consequences could result in outcomes that cause the USA to lose its leadership position in innovation, particularly as a result of the adverse impact on small companies, who have not been represented in the negotiations leading up to this bill. The complexity of the innovation ecosystem being beyond most legislative bodies’ comprehension argues for small incremental changes that are less likely to cause harm in the manner that the well-intended Sarbanes–Oxley Act did.
This is a big concern. The main thing is to be aware of the law, and have a patent attorney with a plan to deal with it.
I haven’t read the legislation but in the past, if you had an idea, there was a procedure whereby you could establish a date of invention and the US Patent Office then gave you 12 months to develop the idea before filing a patent application.
LOL!
Now that the bill has been passed, where can we find out what’s in it?
Here's an idea - tell Obama that he can have the funds for the jobs plan, but he'll have to get it back from Solyndra!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.