02.18.18
Gemini version available ♊︎An Indoctrinated Minority is Maintaining the Illusion That Patent Policy is to Blame for All or Most Problems of the United States
“China” is to the US patent ‘industry’ what “Russia” is to the US defense ‘industry’
Imagine if every nation blamed another for its own errors/shortcomings/failings/bad decisions
Summary: 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
THE patent policy of a country (or continent in the case of the EPO) matters. But it doesn’t matter so profoundly that slight changes in patent policies will make or break countries. That’s just common sense as there’s so much more in this world than patents. The economy too is more than just patents.
“That’s just common sense as there’s so much more in this world than patents.”The USPTO loosened a little on litigation and tightened patent scope, following decisions that had been made by the US Supreme Court (for the most part). This is a good thing as it enables US science and technology firms to operate in the lab rather than the courtroom. This, once again, is common sense.
The “patents4life” blog (advocates just what it says in the name and by “life” it does not mean patent duration) seems to be upset again. Days ago it bemoaned “Weaknesses in IP Protection” (fancy words for “it’s harder to sue with patents”). So a strength in mental faculties and common sense is being framed as “weakness”? The article is actually a rant about Canada, India and Ecuador, three countries where public interest (the big majority) was put ahead of Big Pharma. Watch who the blog is citing; IPO is just a front group of patent extremists looking to patent everything on Earth. Who else can they rely on? The malicious lobby known as “Chamber of Commerce”, which is constantly attacking India* and is engaged in revisionism right now, calling “Father of American Innovation” a person who was not? He did not even innovate slave ownership (he ‘owned’ plenty of slaves).
“This is a good thing as it enables US science and technology firms to operate in the lab rather than the courtroom.”Quite frankly, we often conclude that these people are just delusional. How about this guy called Moskowitz? We mentioned him before. He claims that Big Tech’s or China’s rise is “Enabled by a weakened patent system.” (in the US)
I said he was “[s]till perpetuating the myth that the “patent system” is responsible for everything because this is what they do for a living” and his only response to me was something along the lines of me being an agent for China or whatever (even though I berate China for its own patent policies too — policies that mostly enrich oligarchs). Other people are attempting/pulling the “China” smears against me as well (as recently as last night; several times even).
Notice the theme here; just like the United States often blames Russia for just about anything the patent microcosm blames China for just about anything. Watch another emerging theme, which is shaming of technology firms. The patent microcosm is growingly vocal in its smearing of technology firms. It’s partly ironic because those are the firms that often bring money to lawyers.
“Notice the theme here; just like the United States often blames Russia for just about anything the patent microcosm blames China for just about anything.”The above claim (saying that “patent trolls” as a concept was made up by technology firms) is patently false. They used to be called “sharks” and other words. The graph that the person shows does not support what he says about it. It’s about one particular label, which is predated by other labels (for the same thing). But they carry on with this fiction, ignoring the growing concentration of patent trolls in the United States until some years ago (when the problem was belatedly being put under control).
Citing this new article about China (from The Economist, which blogged a chart), here we have another ‘genius’ who — seeing how the US continues its relative demise (e.g. compared to China) — blames it all on patents (not enough lawsuits?). China was actually making things while other nations got busy litigating and marketing. It spent decades regenerating itself for manufacturing. That’s why China is prospering now (in terms of measures that aren’t per capita).
“Look at this from the viewpoint of when patent reform (the PTAB specifically) really took hold,” the ‘genius’ said. “Correlation is not causation but the timing is hard to ignore.”
“China was actually making things while other nations got busy litigating and marketing.”No, he is just trying to superimpose what he does for a living over a chart that has virtually nothing to do with it. Another person might look at this same chart and blame “Obama” or “liberals” or “piracy” or “hacking”. Here is another slightly older tweet from the same ‘genius’. It links to an article, then ranting about patents and Google. But the article in question has nothing to do with patents, it has nothing to do with Google, and this obsession with patents and Google simply clouds the person’s judgment. These people blame everything (in their own trade, which revolves around lawsuits) on technology firms and they are constantly using China as a scapegoat. It’s just so easy when you cannot make an economic argument/excuse for your own failures. Russia is typically used as a scapegoat for military aspects, on- and off-line. Externalising blame. China is for economic aspects. The name of the ‘genius’ by the way is Gatlin McArthur and based on the Twitter activity it’s some sort of a patent lawyer or troll (it does not say). █
___
* The Chamber of Commerce viciously attacked India’s reputation last year and IAM helped the Chamber of Commerce do this. A few days ago IAM again found a way to attack the credibility of the Indian patent office. IAM actually attacked that office about a dozen times last year alone and it’s not hard to see why. India repels software patents and law firms based in India still obsess over this matter “This case is a classic example where the Patent Office has interpreted the words “computer program per se” to include software programs,” said one firm in a days-old article which digs the archive and says:
This article focuses on the involvement of Section 3(k) in the process of patent application of Apple titled ‘a method for browsing data items with respect to a display screen associated with a computing device and an electronic device’. For reference to those unaware of this section, S 3 of the Indian Patents Act, 1970 bars patent eligibility of some inventions.
ᶃ Gemini Space
This post is also available in 
Content is available under CC-BY-SA