EFF, Public Knowledge and Engine tell the USPTO how to improve patent quality
@doctorow wrote: [Permalink] Read full topic
View ArticleEFF, Public Knowledge and Engine tell the USPTO how to improve patent quality
@Anton_P_Gully wrote: A common concern about software patents is that applicants are able to use invented terminology to avoid prior art. Surely the examiners investigating the patents should have...
View ArticleEFF, Public Knowledge and Engine tell the USPTO how to improve patent quality
@Jim_R wrote: The best idea I have heard: The holder of the patent must demonstrably, clearly use the idea in a product within the first 2 years of issue. A product which has some hope of actually...
View ArticleEFF, Public Knowledge and Engine tell the USPTO how to improve patent quality
@nickpheas wrote: Quick, patent the idea of a searchable database of patents. Read full topic
View ArticleEFF, Public Knowledge and Engine tell the USPTO how to improve patent quality
@gastronaut wrote: In addition to the patent application, the applicant should also provide two patents that are less deserving of their status than the submitted idea, along with supporting...
View ArticleEFF, Public Knowledge and Engine tell the USPTO how to improve patent quality
@agger_modspil wrote: That's really not so simple. The reason is that for each common term, there's a virtual infinity of possible obfuscations. Software patents are usually kept in a vague and silly...
View ArticleEFF, Public Knowledge and Engine tell the USPTO how to improve patent quality
@jandrese wrote: How about: For 1 year after filing (before being disclosed), the patent office sits on the patent. If another patent for the same idea comes in from an independent party, both are...
View ArticleEFF, Public Knowledge and Engine tell the USPTO how to improve patent quality
@agger_modspil wrote: Should it be understood from the emphasis on fighting "abstract" and "vague" software patents that EFF has given up on having software patents abolished altogether? Here's a...
View ArticleEFF, Public Knowledge and Engine tell the USPTO how to improve patent quality
@agger_modspil wrote: Another idea: Let the fee for submitting a bad patent application and have it rejected be four times as much as that of having it approved. That gives the USPTO a reason to act...
View ArticleEFF, Public Knowledge and Engine tell the USPTO how to improve patent quality
@WhyBother wrote: Indeed they are. The summary is a bit misleading, in that it suggests that the EFF is asking the USPTO to actually look for prior art. The real request is actually a request to...
View ArticleEFF, Public Knowledge and Engine tell the USPTO how to improve patent quality
@KarlS wrote: What I would like to see is an additional formal collaborative process to petition for ex-parte reexaminations with minimal formal and financial requirements - crowd-sourced patent...
View ArticleEFF, Public Knowledge and Engine tell the USPTO how to improve patent quality
@andy_hilmer wrote: The biggest problem with curating the quality of patents is that litigators aren't competing against each other to exclude bad patents. Instead, they just cross-license and...
View ArticleEFF, Public Knowledge and Engine tell the USPTO how to improve patent quality
@WhyBother wrote: "just cross-license and acquire" Yes and no. "Cross-license and acquire" makes it sound formal and planned. Instead, most companies today have a portfolio of (mostly bullshit)...
View ArticleEFF, Public Knowledge and Engine tell the USPTO how to improve patent quality
@dweller_below wrote: Back in July I wrote to my US CongressCritters and asked them to consider action to improve Patent quality. Feel free to mine my letter for ideas. I asked them to consider that...
View ArticleClik here to view.
EFF, Public Knowledge and Engine tell the USPTO how to improve patent quality
@Anton_P_Gully wrote: agger_modspil: That's really not so simple. The reason is that for each common term, there's a virtual infinity of possible obfuscations. Software patents are usually kept in a...
View ArticleEFF, Public Knowledge and Engine tell the USPTO how to improve patent quality
@agger_modspil wrote: One could at least say, that if a patent examiner doesn't understand the terms used in a patent application, they should NEVER grant it - somebody else should. If nobody...
View ArticleEFF, Public Knowledge and Engine tell the USPTO how to improve patent quality
@gjbloom wrote: USPTO should implement an "originality bounty". The way it would work is that anyone filing a patent would post a bond guaranteeing the originality of their solution for each claim...
View ArticleEFF, Public Knowledge and Engine tell the USPTO how to improve patent quality
@doctorow wrote: This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed. Read full topic
View ArticleEFF, Public Knowledge and Engine tell the USPTO how to improve patent quality
@doctorow wrote: [Permalink] Read full topic
View ArticleEFF, Public Knowledge and Engine tell the USPTO how to improve patent quality
@Anton_P_Gully wrote: A common concern about software patents is that applicants are able to use invented terminology to avoid prior art. Surely the examiners investigating the patents should have...
View Article
