Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Government Patents United States

US House Takes Up Major Overhaul of Patent System 205

Bookworm09 writes "The House took up the most far-reaching overhaul of the patent system in 60 years today, with a bill both parties say will make it easier for inventors to get their innovations to market and help put people back to work. Backed by Obama and business groups, the legislation aims to ease the lengthy backlog in patent applications, clean up some of the procedures that can lead to costly litigation and put the United States under the same filing system as the rest of the industrialized world."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

US House Takes Up Major Overhaul of Patent System

Comments Filter:
  • by Kongming ( 448396 ) on Wednesday June 22, 2011 @04:47PM (#36534556)

    I have been thinking about a possible model for handling the awarding of patents that might mitigate certain problems with our current patent system. I'm curious as to if anyone has any feedback on it.

    As the last stage of the patent registration process (so when the applicant already knows that the patent will be awarded), the applicant declares how much they will charge to license the patent. There would probably need to be multiple licensing models (flat-rate, per product sold, etc.) that the applicant could opt for - I don't know enough about patent law to go into detail here. The applicant must then pay a fee whose amount is related to the declared licensing cost before the patent is officially awarded. (The clock is already ticking on the patent's expiration, of course.) The applicant is free to charge less to parties to license the patent if they choose, but are obligated to license it to any interested party for no more than the previously declared amount.

    Here are the advantages of the system:

    1. Under the current system, there are currently parties who file or acquire a large number of cheap, vague patents solely in the hopes that some other party develops a massively profitable technology that happens to make use of them so they can extort a large sum of money from them. This practice is a parasitic load on technological development and should not be unnecessarily enabled by our patent system. The fact that the patent registration fee under the model I describe is related to the size of the licensing fee would discourage this practice. If the applicant didn't pay much to register the patents, then they cannot charge much for licensing. If the applicant did have enough confidence that the patents would actually be used profitably when they registered the patents, then that would indicate that the patents were actually of some value.

    2. If the applicant is the proverbial "private inventor" without much in the way of financial resources but develops what they believe to be highly valuable IP, the fact that the fee need not be declared until it is already known that the patent will be awarded will aid in them acquiring investment capital to cover the fees to complete the registration of any relevant patents.

    3. Under the current system, there are some industries in which companies acquire patents on potentially competing technology for the sole purpose of sitting on them and preventing what would otherwise be a better alternative to their business from developing. The mandatory licensing system would effectively prevent this practice, and the relation of registration fees to licensing costs would discourage setting unreasonably high prices to potential competitors.

    Thoughts? Criticisms?

  • by WrongSizeGlass ( 838941 ) on Wednesday June 22, 2011 @05:16PM (#36534984)
    I think you forgot one:
    "registered users" good "anonymous cowards" bad

"If I do not want others to quote me, I do not speak." -- Phil Wayne

Working...