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

07.10.18

Patent Trolls Rally/Advertise Thomas Massie’s Bill to Abolish PTAB and Promote Software Patents in the US

Posted in America, Deception, Law, Patents at 6:23 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Adding to existing injustices

Bayh-Dole
Full paper [PDF]

Summary: Vocal patent maximalists (or think tanks of the litigation ‘industry’) want us to think that the US is too restrictive when it comes to patents (the opposite is true) and tries to change the law so as to plague/saturate the system with patent lawsuits they stand to gain from at the expense of practicing companies

THE patent maximalists want the unreasonable. They want to turn what’s public into private monopolies (e.g. publicly-funded research into patents) and then enjoy immunity from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB) inter partes reviews (IPRs), even when such private monopolies get traded away with patent trolls that sooner or later tax the public.

“They want to turn what’s public into private monopolies (e.g. publicly-funded research into patents) and then enjoy immunity from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB) inter partes reviews (IPRs), even when such private monopolies get traded away with patent trolls that sooner or later tax the public.”Moreover, the patent maximalists want to make companies accountable abroad (outside the US) for infringement of US patents as judged by US courts, as per Western Geco v Ion (see our remarks on this decision). The patent maximalists are to science what the NRA is to public safety. IPO now celebrates Western Geco v Ion in a new “IPO Webinar on Damages”. IPO’s aggressive lobbying for software patents has been covered here many times before; notice this webinar’s leaders; Microsoft’s ‘former’ Bart Eppenauer (now Shook, Hardy & Bacon LLP) is among them.

What bothers us even more is the vanity of patent maximalists, who insist that they should be writing everybody’s laws so as to enrich patent maximalists. This is corruption, but they rely on ‘proxies’ like politicians and pressure groups. Mind Watchtroll’s latest headline, speaking about needing to “[r]estore the patent system” (restore? It was never gone!) and “protect Bayh-Dole” (a subject covered here before, e.g. in [1, 2, 3, 4]).

There’s also an upcoming webinar “on 2018 Bayh Dole Revisions,” which patent maximalists described as follows yesterday: “Technology Transfer Tactics will be offering a webinar entitled “The 2018 Bayh Dole Revisions: Practical Compliance Guidance for Technology Transfer Offices” on July 17, 2018 from 1:00 to 2:00 pm (ET). Charles R. Macedo, Alan Miller and Brian Amos of Amster, Rothstein & Ebenstein LLP will address…”

That’s next week. Notice how only patent maximalists are speaking and attending. The hallmark of lobbying; they try to dominate the system and control the entire dialogue/debate about it. We see the same in Europe whenever or wherever the Unified Patent Court (UPC) gets discussed.

Watchtroll is quite revealing; it’s a lot more blatant and rude than the other patent maximalists. Only yesterday it resumed its Federal Circuit bashing, as we have noted a few times lately. It’s also smearing SCOTUS over its rulings, not just PTAB (not anymore). They are, at present, attacking just about anything, even the former Director of the USPTO (whom they tried to remove from her job). It’s disgusting to watch and this is why we end up with such an ugly system, where the prime goal seems to be granting monopolies on every single thing.

Shobita Parthasarathy, who gives a platform to a radical patent group associated with Watchtroll (showing how they burn patents in an unauthorised protest on USPTO premises), said that “The US patent system is a mess,” by which he means not what Watchtroll means. When Watchtroll said (yesterday) that it wants to “[r]estore the patent system” it means expanding patent scope, whereas Parthasarathy complains that patent scope has already gone way to far. Here are some of the cited examples:

But the dynamics of the patent system have changed in recent decades. Public health activists have filed lawsuits stating that, rather than increasing access to technology, patents create monopolies that make good health unaffordable and inaccessible for many. In 2013, a coalition of patients, health care professionals and scientists challenged patents covering genes linked to breast and ovarian cancer at the US Supreme Court. They argued the patents had led to expensive and poor-quality genetic tests available only through one company: Myriad Genetics, the patent holder.

Meanwhile, small farmers have organized protests against seed patents, suggesting they accelerate the corporate control of agriculture in ways that are damaging for their livelihoods, for innovation, for consumers and for the ecosystem.

And civil society groups have instigated legislative hearings and media campaigns arguing that patents implicitly provide moral certification for the development and commercialization of ethically controversial areas of research and development. Such campaigns began as early as the 1980s, when environmentalists, animal rights organizations and religious figures challenged the patentability of genetically engineered animals. They worried that by turning these animals into commodities, the patent system would transform people’s understanding of ownership and our relationship with the natural environment.

Patent system officials and lawyers tend to view this activism as seriously misguided. They argue that these citizen challengers lack the expertise to understand how the patent system works: It is a limited domain focused merely on certifying the novelty, inventiveness and utility of inventions. This technical and legal orientation is also embedded in the rules and processes of the system, which make it virtually impossible for average citizens to participate, except by submitting patent applications.

This article was later reposted a few times by Government Technology, under the headline “An Early Expression of Democracy, the US Patent System Is Out of Step with Today’s Citizen”.

The likes of Parthasarathy bother patent maximalists because the patent maximalists keep moaning that patents don’t go far enough; in reality, they already go way too far. Watch what the patent trolls’ lobby wrote yesterday. Adam Houldsworth seems to have no qualm promoting patents on nature/life. That’s just his job; that’s what IAM hired him for. When IAM says “but must wait for 101 guidance” it intentionally misleads the patent radicals it preaches to, as if Section 101/Alice/Mayo will imminently be overridden. This is pure fantasy/lobbying. Here’s the summary:

The US Supreme Court’s treatment of patentability in recent times has often been frustrating to life sciences innovators, with last month’s refusal to grasp the nettle of patent eligible subject matter in Cleveland Clinic Foundation v True Health Diagnostics being the latest setback. However, the highest court’s recent grant of certiorari in Helsinn Healthcare v Teva Pharmaceutical is a silver lining for inventors in the sector – creating the prospect of greater certainty on the rules surrounding prior art and novelty under Section 102, an issue which is of great importance that has been thrown into confusion by recent developments at the Federal Circuit.

The US Supreme Court isn’t overturning Alice/Mayo. In fact, it doesn’t even look into anything remotely like Alice/Mayo.

Another patent maximalist, Dennis Crouch, states the obvious, in an effort to slow PTAB down and defend bogus patents, having already attempted to twist the Constitution to influence Oil States and make PTAB obsolete. Is Dennis Crouch trolling the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) on July Fourth? Hard to tell, but these people haven’t given up on the plot to abolish PTAB/IPRs.

Crouch recently did some 'marketing' for Thomas Massie, now backed by and promoted by patent maximalists like Kevin E. Noonan (McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP), as expected. He probably paid to push this into Google News etc. as can be seen here. This was originally mentioned by Patently-O, which promoted it as one can expect (it’s a patent maximalism think tank). What we deal with here is basically a coup attempt; they’re writing the wishlist of the litigation ‘industry’, dressing that up as “Restoring America’s Leadership in Innovation Act.” It’s a pro-software patents, anti-PTAB bill (one of many, all of which have failed).

The reason why all these bills are going pretty much nowhere is that there’s resistance to them from anyone but the litigation ‘industry’. Here’s a new roundup of such bills, posted on Sunday by Watchtroll. When Watchtroll speaks of “Legislative Steps in the Pro-patent Direction” they all just mean patent maximlism, not “pro-patent”. Here for example is Massie’s effort:

New patent legislation would rectify some of the damage done by several court rulings and by Congress.

[...]

Reps. Thomas Massie (R-KY) and Marcy Kaptur (D-OH) have introduced H.R. 6264, the Restoring America’s Leadership in Innovation Act.

Notice the usually/typically loaded bill titles (with words like “innovation” that nobody wants to say “no” to). This article appears to have motivated this dramatic tweet about something that’s a week old and done during the summer recess (no politicians to support it): “BREAKING: US Software Patents are back with H.R. 6264, the Restoring America’s Leadership in Innovation Act (section 7 aims to get rid of Supreme Court’s Alice jurisprudence) [] Section 7 confirms the patentability of scientific discoveries and software. [...] The legislation largely adopts the language of recent proposals by the Intellectual Property Owners Association and American Intellectual Property Lawyers Association. [] It explicitly states that it “effectively abrogates” Alice and related Supreme Court opinions on patent eligibility [] US Software Patents Law: “This amendment abrogates Alice and its predecessors to ensure that life sciences discoveries, computer software, and similar inventions and discoveries are patentable, and that those patents are enforceable” https://cdn.patentlyo.com/media/2018/07/FinalPatentBill.pdf …”” (quoting the original)

“No, it won’t pass,” I told him. It’s just one of many failed efforts, going back almost to Alice (2014). It’s another shot in the dark. It’s being promoted by a patent troll, Dominion Harbor. That says a lot about who’s looking to benefit — the very antithesis of “innovation”.

We’re surprised that HTIA, EFF and others have not yet remarked on this bill. Many people are simply on holiday right now. Patent Progress, which strongly supports PTAB and is composed solely by Josh Landau (CCIA), wrote this a day ago:

Today, the Computer & Communications Industry Association submitted its comments opposing the Patent Office’s proposal to change the claim construction standard applied in AIA trials from the current broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) to the Phillips standard district courts apply.

Here is the document [PDF] in question. Maybe it’s time for technology companies’ front groups to publicly explain what a ludicrous bill Massie put forth, serving nobody but the litigation ‘industry’ under the guise of “innovation”.

“Restoring America’s Leadership” is another one of those silly sound bites which is a loaded statement, perhaps alluding to the recent lies from the Chamber of Commerce. Leadership is still with the US, partly owing to patent reform, not in spite of it.

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. The EPO (European Patent Office) Under António Campinos is Just Another Battistelli EPO; Still UPC and Software Patents Lobbying

    Campinos has done pretty much nothing but a single blog post since taking Office; it makes one wonder what he's doing all day and whether he ever intends to tackle all the abuses that compelled the Council to replace Battistelli



  2. Cisco v Arista Networks is a Stain on the Reputation of the US International Trade Commission (ITC) and It's Beginning to Recognise This

    Cisco is leveraging software patents which PTAB deemed to be invalid against a much smaller firm (revenue ~30 times smaller), demanding an embargo and bypassing the ordinary routes of justice by turning to the ITC



  3. Openet Has Been Intimidated by Amdocs Using Another Patent Infringement Lawsuit

    Amdocs is still engaging in legal intimidation and litigious bullying against its much smaller rivals/competitors; Openet is the latest reminder of it, having paid an undisclosed amount of money to end the dispute



  4. Federal Circuit Judges Moore, Dyk and Reyna Tell Allergan That It is Not Above the Law

    Allergan and a Native American tribe have lost their ridiculous case; after swapping tens of millions of dollars in pursuit of immunity for patents they've lost again (in what's likely their last resort/appeal); expect the patent microcosm to attempt to distract from it (like they did Oil States)



  5. Links 20/7/2018: MusicBrainz is Back, Microsoft Pushing .NET Through Canonical

    Links for the day



  6. Some US Patents' Quality is So Low That There's a Garden Clearance/Fire Sale

    Rather than shoot worthless patents into orbit where they belong the Allied Security Trust (AST), collector of dubious patents, will try to sell them to gullible opportunists and patent trolls (even if the said patents would likely perish in courts)



  7. When Amplifying the Message of 'Global Innovation Index 2018' IP Watch Sounds Like WIPO and IP Watchdog (Watchtroll)

    In addition to senatorial efforts and misleading debates about patents, we now contend with something called “Global Innovation Index 2018," whose purpose appears to be similar to the debunked Chamber of Commerce's rankings (quantifying everything in terms of patents)



  8. Erosion of Patent Justice in Europe With Kangaroo Courts and Low-Quality European Patents

    The problematic combination of plaintiff-friendly courts (favouring the accuser, just like in Eastern Texas) and low-quality patents that should never have been granted



  9. Mafia Tactics in Team UPC and Battistelli's Circle

    Mafia-like behaviour at the EPO and the team responsible for the Unified Patent Court (UPC); appointments of loyal friends and family members have become common (nepotism and exchange of favours), as have threats made towards critics, authorities, and the press



  10. Australia Says No to Software Patents

    Rokt is now fighting the Australian patent office over its decision to reject software patents; Shelston IP, an Australian patent law firm (originally from Melbourne), already meddles a great deal in such policies/decisions, hoping to overturn them



  11. Links 19/7/2018: Krita 4.1.1, Qt Creator 4.7.0, and Microsoft-Led Lobby Against Android in EU

    Links for the day



  12. IAM is Pushing SEPs/FRAND Agenda for Patent Trolls and Monopolists That Fund IAM

    The front group of patent trolls, IAM, sets up an echo chamber-type event, preceded by all the usual pro-FRAND propaganda



  13. “Trade Secrets” Litigation Rising in the Wake of TC Heartland, Alice, Oil States and Other Patent-Minimising Decisions

    Litigation strategies are evolving in the wake of top-level decisions that rule out software patents, restrict venue shifting, and facilitate invalidation of patents even outside the courtroom



  14. The EPO -- Like the Unified Patent Court (UPC) and Unitary Patent System -- is an Untenable Mess

    The António Campinos-led EPO, nearly three weeks under his leadership, still fails to commit to justice (court rulings not obeyed), undo union-busting efforts and assure independence of judges; this, among other factors, is why the Office/Organisation and the UPC it wants to manage appear more or less doomed



  15. Links 18/7/2018: System76's Manufacturing Facility, Microsoft-Led Lobby for Antitrust Against Android

    Links for the day



  16. What Patent Lawyers Aren't Saying: Most Patent Litigation Has Become Too Risky to be Worth It

    The lawyers' key to the castle is lost or misplaced; they can't quite find/obtain leverage in courts, but they don't want their clients to know that



  17. Software Patents Royalty (Tax) Campaign by IBM, a Serial Patent Bully, and the EPO's Participation in All This

    The agenda of US-based patent maximalists, including patent trolls and notorious bullies from the United States, is still being served by the 'European' Patent Office, which has already outsourced some of its work (e.g. translations, PR, surveillance) to the US



  18. The European Council Needs to Check Battistelli's Back Room Deals/Back Door/Backchannel With Respect to Christian Archambeau

    Worries persist that Archambeau is about to become an unworthy beneficiary (nepotism) after a Battistelli setup that put Campinos in power, supported by the Belgian delegation which is connected to Archambeau, a national/citizen of Belgium



  19. PTAB and § 101 (Section 101) Have Locked the Patent Parasites Out of the Patent System

    Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) inter partes reviews (IPRs) have contributed a great deal to patent quality and have reduced the number of frivolous patent lawsuits; this means that firms which profit from patent applications and litigation hate it with a passion and still lobby to weaken if not scuttle PTAB



  20. Patents on Computer Software and Plants in the United States Indicative of Systemic Error

    The never-ending expansion of patent scope has meant that patent law firms generally got their way at the patent office; can the courts react fast enough (before confidence in patents and/or public support for patents is altogether shattered)?



  21. Yesterday's Misleading News From Team UPC and Its Aspiring Management of the Unified Patent Court (UPC)

    The Unified Patent Court (UPC) enthusiasts — i.e. those looking to financially gain from it — continue to wrestle with logic, manipulate words and misrepresent the law; yesterday we saw many law firms trying to make it sound as though the UPC is coming to the UK even though this isn’t possible and UPC as a whole is likely already dead



  22. Time for the European Commission to Investigate EPO Corruption Because It May be Partly or Indirectly Connected to EU-IPO, an EU Agency

    The passage of the top role at the EU-IPO from António Campinos to Christian Archambeau would damage confidence in the moral integrity of the European Council; back room deals are alleged to have occurred, implicating corrupt Battistelli



  23. Links 17/7/2018: Catfish 1.4.6 Released, ReactOS 0.4.9, Red Hat's GPL Compliance Group Grows

    Links for the day



  24. Links 16/7/2018: Linux 4.18 RC5, Latte Dock v0.8, Windows Back Doors Resurface

    Links for the day



  25. Alliance for US Startups and Inventors for Jobs (USIJ) Misleads the US Government, Pretending to Speak for Startups While Spreading Lies for the Patent Microcosm

    In the United States, which nowadays strives to raise the patent bar, the House Small Business Committee heard from technology firms but it also heard from some questionable front groups which claim to support "startups" and "jobs" (but in reality support just patents on the face of it)



  26. 'Blockchain', 'Cloud' and Whatever Else Gets Exploited to Work Around 35 U.S.C. § 101 (or the EPC) and Patent Algorithms/Software

    Looking for a quick buck or some low-quality patents (which courts would almost certainly reject), opportunists carry on with their gold rush, aided by buzzwords and hype over pretty meaningless things



  27. PTAB Defended by the EFF, the R Street Institute and CCIA as the Number of Petitions (IPRs) Continues to Grow

    Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) inter partes reviews (IPRs) come to the rescue when patently-bogus patents are used, covering totally abstract concepts (like software patents do); IPRs continue to increase in number and opponents of PTAB, who conveniently cherry-pick Supreme Court (SCOTUS) decisions, can't quite stop that



  28. IAM/Joff Wild May Have Become a de Facto Media Partner of the Patent Troll iPEL

    Invitation to trolls in China, courtesy of the patent trolls' lobby called "IAM"; this shows no signs of stopping and has become rather blatant



  29. Cautionary Tale: ILO Administrative Tribunal Cases (Appeals) 'Intercepted' Under António Campinos

    The ILO Administrative Tribunal (ILO-AT) is advertised by the EPO's management as access to justice, but it's still being undermined quite severely to the detriment of aggrieved staff



  30. Asking the USPTO to Comply With 35 U.S.C. § 101 is Like Asking Pentagon Officials to Pursue Real, Persistent Peace

    Some profit from selling weapons, whereas others profit from patent grants and litigation; what's really needed right now is patent sanity and adherence to the public interest as well as the law itself, e.g. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) decisions


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