EditorsAbout the SiteComes vs. MicrosoftUsing This Web SiteSite ArchivesCredibility IndexOOXMLOpenDocumentPatentsNovellNews DigestSite NewsRSS

02.10.18

The Chamber of Corporations, Together With the Trolls’ Lobby, Resorts to Alarmist Propaganda in an Effort to Alter Patent Policy

Posted in America, Asia, Patents at 12:07 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

And as usual they use China as the scaremongering strategy

The Chinese Are Coming

Summary: Seeing that the US patent system has made moderate improvements to the quality of patents, businesses that rely on aggression make a whole lot of noise, pointing to “reports” or an “index” which bashes US patent policy

THE USPTO recently improved. Tomorrow and on Monday we’ll say a lot about PTAB. Numbers are increasing; not just patent numbers but also oppositions. Patents are no longer regarded as a “slam dunk”; they’re scrutinised more closely by courts, by PTAB and even by examiners (in spite of the temptation to just grant everything).

Patent microcosm, patent maximalists, patent radicals or whatever one calls them are losing their minds. They keep shouting about "China!" as if Chinese patent policy is the “gold standard” or a yardstick all of a sudden. Didn’t they spend decades if not centuries moaning about China being “pirates” or “thieves” and “knockoffs” or “ripoffs”? Why is China suddenly a role model to them? Intellectual dishonesty knows no bounds. All they care about is how much money they can make at the end of the day. Lawsuits are “business”. Threats are “business”. Convincing clients to pursue patents they don’t need and will never use is “business”. Whose business?

See this tweet which said (just a few days ago): “The decline in start-ups is blamed on incumbency and inability to disrupt. Could it be that our IP policies do not support new entrants?”

No, nothing to do with ‘IP’ policies. “You just superimpose your agenda onto unrelated news,” I told him.

This has become so typical. Any time some bad news about the US goes ‘viral’ the patent microcosm leaps/jumps at the opportunity to somehow frame that as ‘proof’ that patent policy needs to change. It has not only become laughable; it’s tiring because it’s impossible to rebut this echo chamber, simply because of the scale (their lies propagate among themselves ad infinitum).

The Chamber of Commerce (we typically call it "Chamber of Corporations" or "Chamber of Corporates") and USTR are not reliable sources of information. We exposed some of their malicious lies about 6-8 years ago, based on many cables published by Wikileaks (it’s commonly known as “Cablegate” and it’s a massive repository of information).

The Chamber of Commerce and USTR basically ‘rank’ countries based on how subservient they are to the largest US-based corporations. We were therefore disappointed to see IP Watch giving a platform to the Chamber of Commerce, which is a patent maximalist. On the same day (yesterday) IP Watch was also giving a platform to another patent maximalist (voice of imperialist oligarchs). In both cases it’s behind a paywall and Google News picks it up, so people will judge everything by headlines like “US Industry Index Makes Case For Strong IP Protection Worldwide” and “On IPR, Major US Trading Partners In Firing Line Of US Industry, While Cancer Patients Ask For Access”.

IP Watch is generally a good site, but in the interest of “balance” it often relays public relations material for lobbyists. This is not helpful to their reputation. The above-mentioned Chamber of Commerce “index” is already being exploited for the usual bashing of India, where software patents are not allowed. They do this every year. The Chamber of Commerce continues to bully and shame India, typically helped by sites like IAM, and business press then comes up with headlines like “India ranks 44 out of 50 nations in intellectual property index” (because it says no to unethical patents).

An article by Avadhi Joshi (Khurana and Khurana) meanwhile attempts to bring up a subject they refuse to leave alone. The headline says “India: Do Software Patents Actually Fall Under The Ambit Of Section 3(k)?”

What we have here is a bunch of patent lawyers continuing to disregard the law while striving to pursue software patents. From the opening paragraph:

Section 3k is often criticized for its ambiguity of the words “computer programme per se”. Though the Indian Patent Act doesn’t explicitly disallow software programs, a lot has been left to interpretation of the same, which in turn has been to many companies’ benefit. This article will analyze the patentability of software programs with support of a few cases.

We expect IAM to write something about that soon. Last year alone it wrote nearly 10 articles bashing India over its patent policy. At times, as expected, IAM cited the Chamber of Commerce for 'proof'. But it’s not just IAM. It’s easy to tell that Watchtroll is a nefarious site when it relies on the villainous Chamber of Commerce to construct a lobbying argument. That’s just what it did 2 days ago, resorting to old panic tactics and drama. Here’s what it said: “The United States was once again the top ranked country in overall score in the U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s annual Global IP Index for 2018, but the rankings are closer than ever. This year the United States edged out the United Kingdom by a mere .01 points on the Chamber scale”

What they’re basically measuring is patent maximalism and things like that. As if patent maximalism is absolutely desirable (it is to some occupations, like litigators)…

Watch some other headlines to the same effect: “The U.S. dropped to 12th place in countries with best patent systems”

What do they even mean by “best”? Certainly not patent quality. Remember, this is the Chamber of Commerce we’re talking about here. The name is misleading as it’s not a Federal thing but more of a corporate front group. The patent microcosm now relies on the villainous Chamber of Commerce, which is a lobby for special interests…

Here is what IAM wrote in Twitter: “US falls again in patent rankings in latest @USChamber IP report. Down to 12th now, below Italy.”

The report [PDF] is almost 200 pages long. We took a quick look. IAM added: “As well as another fall for the US it’s worth noting the big gains made by the by Korea’s patent system – up from 12th to 6th…”

But what does the rank even mean? What is it based on? Not actual patent quality.

Here’s a patent maximalist hollering at the USPTO: “We’re Number 12, We’re Number 12… https://twitter.com/uspto/status/961630897920532482 …”

He’s trying to pressure them to go back to patent maximalism.

Another patent maximalist said: “Below Italy (!?) the (mighty) American patent system continues to fall. #EfficientInfringers & their mouthpieces @EFF @publicknowledge & other allegedly “public interest” groups are great at defeating US industrial policy & undermine #Inventors & horrific at creating jobs https://twitter.com/iam_magazine/status/961609122776002561 …”

As if EFF and Public Knowledge are less credible than the Chamber of Commerce? The EFF and Public Knowledge care about their country; the Chamber of Commerce cares about a few oligarchs in need of protectionism.

Here comes the Koch-funded lobby for patent trolls. Adam Mossoff wrote: “IMPORTANT READ: “U.S. Innovation Economy Falls Even Further in Latest GIPC Patent Rankings.” For 2nd year in a row, US drops in rankings due to uncertainty & anti-patent changes in past decade. Time to #fixPTAB & #fix101 to save US #innovation leadership!”

Remember that Mossoff and his collaborators are funded by oligarchs. One response said: “Last year = possible anomaly. This year = trend. Everyone in IP should be troubled by this.”

“Everyone in IP” means patent lawyers and the likes of them, including patent trolls whom they service.

Good riddance.

Iancu is then invoked: “#1 -> #10 -> #12. This year the icepick is only 20% deeper into our eye! How much more of a wakeup call do we need? Sure counting on Dir. Iancu to arrest this slide.”

Will Iancu work for the patent microcosm that he came from? We worry so. Will he succumb to pressure from the Chamber of Commerce or listen to voices of reason such as the EFF and Public Knowledge?

Dennis Crouch, as usual, uses the “China card” to ‘guide’ Iancu back into patent maximalism traps. Watch what he wrote some days ago:

I wrote earlier this week that the Chinese patent system is at a crossroads as it reaches middle-age. I believe that the US patent system is also at a crossroads – ready to be refreshed and renewed, but tentative about what that will mean for established interests. I look forward to hearing Iancu’s vision for the future and his ideas for implementation.

Here they go again with “China!”

For crying out loud, have they run out of rational arguments? There’s no potent argument for patent maximalism, so they just lean on ‘China envy’ if not full-blown Chinophobia.

Lobby group IAM is also pressuring Iancu. It’s asking him to listen to the Chamber of Commerce and ruin the system’s reforms for the sake of maximalists/trolls. IAM is giving him tasks using alarmist nonsense. From the closing paragraph: “The Chamber’s IP index has undoubtedly become a cudgel for critics of the US patent system to drive home their point that changes need to be made to instill greater certainty into section 101, particularly in areas like medical diagnostics, and to address the concerns that IPR remains skewed against patent owners. That it has once again shown America’s decline relative to other leading IP jurisdictions underscores the size of the task facing the recently confirmed USPTO director Andrei Iancu. Restoring some faith in the US patent system may well feature prominently on his to-do list.”

In contrast, there are voices of reason that do not rely on what IAM calls “The Chamber” above (“the” — as though it’s something quite so authoritative). The R Street Institute, for example, has just published this opinion/article at The Hill. Charles Duan, who describes himself as “a senior fellow and associate director of tech and innovation policy at the R Street Institute,” asks Iancu to improve patent quality. Here is what he wrote about PTAB: “Maintaining the effectiveness of post-grant patent review procedures. The procedures introduced in 2011 with the America Invents Act — namely inter partes review, post-grant review and covered business methods review — are critical to ensuring that erroneously-granted patents can be efficiently reconsidered, limiting any damage they may cause. Already, parties have used inter partes review to challenge questionable patents on technologies such as podcasting and software activation. Proceedings like inter partes review work well because, in large part, they are run by expert judges of an expert agency with experience in patent law and technology. Certainly, there are procedural elements for the USPTO to refine. But the agency should reject critics’ calls to eliminate the proceedings entirely, to limit severely their effectiveness, or to devolve certain disputes (such as those over pharmaceuticals) to generalist federal courts.”

Here’s what Duan said about quality: “Improving patent quality and internal monitoring procedures. Poor-quality patents — especially those on old or obvious ideas — provide no value to innovation or the economy, and in fact can detract from economic growth. The USPTO is the first line of defense against poor-quality patents being issued, and it should dedicate resources to examiner training and internal monitoring systems that focus on the correctness of decisions to grant patents.”

The Hill has also published an opinion of an opposite nature. Kristen Jakobsen Osenga wants more patent litigation, almost as if that in its own right would spur innovation. Here’s what he said:

Part of the reason the U.S. innovation economy has flourished is because of our strong patent system. Lately, however, the strength of this patent system has been eroding, due to changes that have decreased the value of patents and made patent rights less certain.

[...]

When a company that used to pay a license to use a technology can stop paying a licensing fee but continue to use the technology and simply wait for the patent owner to sue it, that’s a sign of a weak patent system.

When, after a company is found to be infringing a valid patent on a technology developed by others, others step in on its behalf to argue that the infringer should be allowed to continue its behavior, that’s a sign of a patent system that is eroding.

The headline of the piece from Kristen Jakobsen Osenga is “US takes one step forward, two steps back on innovation,” but it has absolutely nothing to do with innovation. It’s all about patents.

The CCIA too had a response to misleading headlines and patent lawyers who intentionally conflate patents with innovation (the classic lie). The CCIA’s site Patent Progress wrote:

As part of Patent Progress’ series on innovation in the United States, we are examining ways to measure innovation. One useful metric, measuring the investment being made in the creation of new and innovative technologies, is research and development spending. This metric tends to show the investment in innovation, in particular by larger companies. And if we examine R&D spending, we see the same story we saw with respect to startups and venture capital earlier in our series—innovation in the United States continues to be world-class.

Do not fall for the illusion that economic success and innovation depend on patents. In the right balance they might. But patent maximalism as promoted by “The Chamber” together with IAM and Watchtroll is all about giving away money to lawyers and trolls.

Share this post: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Reddit
  • co.mments
  • DZone
  • email
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • NewsVine
  • Print
  • Technorati
  • TwitThis
  • Facebook

If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.

Pages that cross-reference this one

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.

What Else is New


  1. Links 19/2/2018: Linux 4.16 RC2, Nintendo Switch Now Full-fledged GNU/Linux

    Links for the day



  2. PTAB Continues to Invalidate a Lot of Software Patents and to Stop Patent Examiners From Issuing Them

    Erasure of software patents by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) carries on unabated in spite of attempts to cause controversy and disdain towards PTAB



  3. The Patent 'Industry' Likes to Mention Berkheimer and Aatrix to Give the Mere Impression of Section 101/Alice Weakness

    Contrary to what patent maximalists keep saying about Berkheimer and Aatrix (two decisions of the Federal Circuit from earlier this month, both dealing with Alice-type challenges), neither actually changed anything in any substantial way



  4. Makan Delrahim is Wrong; Patents Are a Major Antitrust Problem, Sometimes Disguised Using Trolls Somewhere Like the Eastern District of Texas

    Debates and open disagreements over the stance of the lobbyist who is the current United States Assistant Attorney General for the Antitrust Division



  5. Patent Trolls Watch: Microsoft-Connected Intellectual Ventures, Finjan, and Rumour of Technicolor-InterDigital Buyout

    Connections between various patent trolls and some patent troll statistics which have been circulated lately



  6. Software Patents Trickle in After § 101/Alice, But Courts Would Not Honour Them Anyway

    The dawn of § 101/Alice, which in principle eliminates almost every software patent, means that applicants find themselves having to utilise loopholes to fool examiners, but that's unlikely to impress judges (if they ever come to assessing these patents)



  7. In Aatrix v Green Shades the Court is Not Tolerating Software Patents But Merely Inquires/Wonders Whether the Patents at Hand Are Abstract

    Aatrix alleges patent infringement by Green Shades, but whether the patents at hand are abstract or not remains to be seen; this is not what patent maximalists claim it to be ("A Valentine for Software Patent Owners" or "valentine for patentee")



  8. An Indoctrinated Minority is Maintaining the Illusion That Patent Policy is to Blame for All or Most Problems of the United States

    The zealots who want to patent everything under the Sun and sue everyone under the Sun blame nations in the east (where the Sun rises) for all their misfortunes; this has reached somewhat ludicrous levels



  9. Berkheimer Decision is Still Being Spun by the Anti-Section 101/Alice Lobby

    12 days after Berkheimer v HP Inc. the patent maximalists continue to paint this decision as a game changer with regards to patent scope; the reality, however, is that this decision will soon be forgotten about and will have no substantial effect on either PTAB or Alice (because it's about neither of these)



  10. Academic Patent Immunity is Laughable and Academics Are Influenced by Corporate Money (for Steering Patent Agenda)

    Universities appear to have become battlegrounds in the war between practicing entities and a bunch of parasites who make a living out of litigation and patent bubbles



  11. UPC Optimism Languishes Even Among Paid UPC Propagandists Such as IAM

    Even voices which are attempting to give UPC momentum that it clearly lacks admit that things aren't looking well; the UK is not ratifying and Germany make take years to look into constitutional barriers



  12. Bejin Bieneman Props Up the Disgraced Randall Rader for Litigation Agenda

    Randall Rader keeps hanging out with the litigation 'industry' -- the very same 'industry' which he served in a closeted fashion when he was Chief Judge of the Federal Circuit (and vocal proponent of software patents, patent trolls and so on)



  13. With Stambler v Mastercard, Patent Maximalists Are Hoping to Prop Up Software Patents and Damage PTAB

    The patent 'industry' is hoping to persuade the highest US court to weaken the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), for PTAB is making patent lawsuits a lot harder and raises the threshold for patent eligibility



  14. Apple Discovers That Its Patent Disputes Are a Losing Battle Which Only Lawyers Win (Profit From)

    By pouring a lot of money and energy into the 'litigation card' Apple lost focus and it's also losing some key cases, as its patents are simply not strong enough



  15. The Patent Microcosm Takes Berkheimer v HP Out of Context to Pretend PTAB Disregards Fact-Finding Process

    In view or in light of a recent decision (excerpt above), patent maximalists who are afraid of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) try to paint it as inherently unjust and uncaring for facts



  16. Microsoft Has Left RPX, But RPX Now Pays a Microsoft Patent Troll, Intellectual Ventures

    The patent/litigation arms race keeps getting a little more complicated, as the 'arms' are being passed around to new and old entities that do nothing but shake-downs



  17. UPC Has Done Nothing for Europe Except Destruction of the EPO and Imminent Layoffs Due to Lack of Applications and Lowered Value of European Patents

    The Unified Patent Court (UPC) is merely a distant dream or a fantasy for litigators; to everyone else the UPC lobby has done nothing but damage, including potentially irreparable damage to the European Patent Office, which is declining very sharply



  18. Links 17/2/2018: Mesa 17.3.4, Wine 3.2, Go 1.10

    Links for the day



  19. Patent Trolls Are Thwarted by Judges, But Patent Lawyers View Them as a 'Business' Opportunity

    Patent lawyers are salivating over the idea that trolls may be coming to their state/s; owing to courts and the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) other trolls' software patents get invalidated



  20. Microsoft's Patent Moves: Dominion Harbor, Intellectual Ventures, Intellectual Discovery, NEC and Uber

    A look at some of the latest moves and twists, as patents change hands and there are still signs of Microsoft's 'hidden hand'



  21. Links 15/2/2018: GNOME 3.28 Beta, Rust 1.24

    Links for the day



  22. Bavarian State Parliament Has Upcoming Debate About Issues Which Can Thwart UPC for Good

    An upcoming debate about Battistelli's attacks on the EPO Boards of Appeal will open an old can of worms, which serves to show why UPC is a non-starter



  23. The EPO is Being Destroyed and There's Nothing Left to Replace It Except National Patent Offices

    It looks like Battistelli is setting up the European Patent Office (EPO) for mass layoffs; in fact, it looks as though he is so certain that the UPC will materialise that he obsesses over "validation" for mass litigation worldwide, departing from a "model office" that used to lead the world in terms of patent quality and workers' welfare/conditions



  24. IBM is Getting Desperate and Now Suing Microsoft Over Lost Staff, Not Just Suing Everyone Using Patents

    IBM's policy when it comes to patents, not to mention its alignment with patent extremists, gives room for thought if not deep concern; the company rapidly becomes more and more like a troll



  25. In Microsoft's Lawsuit Against Corel the Only Winner is the Lawyers

    The outcome of the old Microsoft v Corel lawsuit reaffirms a trend; companies with deep pockets harass their competitors, knowing that the legal bills are more cumbersome to the defendants; there's a similar example today in Cisco v Arista Networks



  26. The Latest Lies About Unitary Patent (UPC) and the EPO

    Lobbying defies facts; we are once again seeing some easily-debunked talking points from those who stand to benefit from the UPC and mass litigation



  27. Speech Deficit and No Freedom of Association at the EPO

    True information cannot be disseminated at the EPO and justice too is beyond elusive; this poses a threat to the EPO's future, not only to its already-damaged reputation



  28. No, Britain is Not Ratifying 'Unitary' Anything, But Team UPC Insinuates It Will (Desperate Effort to Affect Tomorrow's Outcome)

    Contrary to several misleading headlines from Bristows (in its blog and others'), the UPC isn't happening and isn't coming to the UK; it all amounts to lobbying (by setting false expectations)



  29. The EPO's Paid Promotion of Software Patents Gets Patent Maximalists All Excited and Emboldened

    The software patents advocacy from Battistelli (and his cohorts) isn't just a spit in the face of European Parliament but also the EPC; but patent scope seems to no longer exist or matter under his watch, as all he cares about is granting as many patents as possible, irrespective of real quality/legitimacy/merit



  30. Andrei Iancu Begins His USPTO Career While Former USPTO Director (and Now Paid Lobbyist) Keeps Meddling in Office Affairs

    The USPTO, which is supposed to be a government branch (loosely speaking) is being lobbied by former officials, who are now being paid by private corporations to help influence and shape policies; this damages the image of the Office and harms its independence from corporate influence


CoPilotCo

RSS 64x64RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates

Home iconSite Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content

Home iconSite Home: Background about the site and some key features in the front page

Chat iconIRC Channel: Come and chat with us in real time

CoPilotCo

Recent Posts