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

What Else is New


  1. Links 26/4/2019: Best GNU/Linux Laptops and More

    Links for the day



  2. Research Into Who's Putting DRM Inside Linux

    Back doors may be hard to detect (requires understanding a lot of underlying code), but how about malicious 'features' or antifeatures that are put in the kernel to serve Hollywood at the expense of the kernel's users?



  3. "Dia da Liberdade" in Portugal -- Wilted Carnations in EPOnia

    "Reliable sources report that the discontent continues to simmer among the EPOnian peasantry and that the steam is slowly but inexorably building up inside the pressure cooker," tells us a guest writer



  4. The Quality of Patents is Connected to the Quality of Life of Patent Examiners

    EPO staff is not happy (a new President has not changed things) and the problems associated with low quality of patents become more visible in courtrooms



  5. American Patent Courts Keep Narrowing Patent Scope, No Matter What Few Politicians Are Doing on Behalf of Litigation Firms and Patent Trolls

    Acts of desperation in the patent microcosm of the United States, where judges now overwhelmingly reject software patents at all levels (tribunals, lower courts, higher courts)



  6. Links 25/4/2019: Rancher Labs Releases Slim OS, OpenBSD 6.5 is Ready

    Links for the day



  7. Links 24/4/2019: Chrome 74, QEMU 4.0 Released

    Links for the day



  8. Supreme Court of the UK, Which Habitually Throws Out European Patents, May Overturn Troublesome Unwired Planet v Huawei Decision

    A lot of European Patents are facing growing scrutiny from courts (Team UPC, including Bristows, publicly complains about it this month) and "greenwashing" of the Office won't be enough to paint/frame these patents as "ethical"



  9. German Federal Patent Court Curbs the Patent Maximalism of the EPO, Which Promotes Patents on Nature and/or Maths Every Single Day

    European courts are restraining the EPO, which has been trying to bypass or replace such courts (with the UPC); it certainly seems as though European Patents rapidly lose their legitimacy or much-needed presumption of validity



  10. Any 'Linux' Foundation Needs to Be Managed by Geeks, Not Politicians and PR People

    Linux bureaucracy has put profits way ahead of technical merits and this poses a growing threat or constitutes risk to the direction of the project, not to mention its ownership



  11. Links 23/4/2019: Kodi 'Leia' 18.2 and DeX Everywhere

    Links for the day



  12. Code of Coercion

    Entryism is visible for all to see, but pointing it out is becoming a risky gambit because of the "be nice!" (or "be polite!") crowd, which shields the perpetrators of a slow and gradual corporate takeover



  13. António Campinos Would Not Refer to the EPO's Enlarged Board of Appeal If He Did Not Control the Outcomes

    António Campinos and his ilk aren’t interested in patent quality because his former ‘boss’, who publicly denied there were issues and vainly rejected patent quality concerns as illegitimate, is now controlled by him (reversal of roles) and many new appointees at the top are "yes men" (or women) of Campinos, former colleagues whom he bossed at EUIPO (as expected)



  14. Links 22/4/2019: Linux 5.1 RC6, New Release of Netrunner and End of Scientific Linux

    Links for the day



  15. USPTO and EPO Both Slammed for Abandoning Patent Quality and Violating the Law/Caselaw in Order to Grant Illegitimate Patents on Life/Nature and Mathematics

    Mr. Iancu, the ‘American Battistelli’ (appointed owing to nepotism), mirrors the ‘Battistelli operandi’, which boils down to treating judges like they’re stooges and justices like an ignorable nuisance — all this in the name of litigation profits, which necessitate constant wars over illegitimate patents (it is expensive to prove their illegitimacy)



  16. IRC Proceedings: January 27th, 2019 – March 24th, 2019

    Many IRC logs



  17. IRC Proceedings: December 2nd, 2018 – January 26th, 2019

    Many IRC logs



  18. Links 21/4/2019: SuperTuxKart's 1.0 Release, Sam Hartman Is Debian’s Newest Project Leader (DPL)

    Links for the day



  19. The EPO's Use of Phrases Like “High-Quality Patent Services” Means They Know High-Quality European Patents Are 'Bygones'

    The EPO does a really poor job hiding the fact that its last remaining objective is to grant as many European Patents as possible (and as fast as possible), conveniently conflating quality with pace



  20. A Reader's Suggestion: Directions for Techrights

    Guest post by figosdev



  21. Links 20/4/2019: Weblate 3.6 and Pop!_OS 19.04

    Links for the day



  22. The Likes of Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys (CIPA), Team Campinos and Team UPC Don't Represent Europe But Hurt Europe

    The abject disinterest in patent quality and patent validity (as judged by courts) threatens Europe but not to the detriment of those who are in the 'business' of suing and printing lots of worthless patents



  23. The Linux Foundation Needs to Change Course Before GNU/Linux (as a Free Operating System) is Dead

    The issues associated with the Linux Foundation are not entirely new; but Linux now incorporates so many restrictions and contains so many binary blobs that one begins to wonder what "Linux" even means



  24. Largest Patent Offices Try to Leave Courts in a State of Disarray to Enable the Granting of Fake Patents in the US and Europe

    Like a monarchy that effectively runs all branches of government the management of the EPO is trying to work around the judiciary; the same is increasingly happening (or at least attempted) in the United States



  25. Links 19/4/2019: PyPy 7.1.1, LabPlot 2.6, Kipi Plugins 5.9.1 Released

    Links for the day



  26. Links 18/4/2019: Ubuntu and Derivatives Have Releases, digiKam 6.1.0, OpenSSH 8.0 and LibreOffice 6.2.3

    Links for the day



  27. Freedom is Not a Business and Those Who Make 'Business' by Giving it Away Deserve Naming

    Free software is being parceled and sold to private monopolisers; those who facilitate the process enrich themselves and pose a growing threat to freedom in general — a subject we intend to tackle in the near future



  28. Concluding the Linux Foundation (LF) “Putting the CON in Conference!” (Part 3)

    Conferences constructed or put together based on payments rather than merit pose a risk to the freedom of free software; we conclude our series about events set up by the largest of culprits, which profits from this erosion of freedom



  29. “Mention the War” (of Microsoft Against GNU/Linux)

    The GNU/Linux desktop (or laptops) seems to be languishing or deteriorating, making way for proprietary takeover in the form of Vista 10 and Chrome OS and “web apps” (surveillance); nobody seems too bothered — certainly not the Linux Foundation — by the fact that GNU/Linux itself is being relegated or demoted to a mere “app” on these surveillance platforms (WSL, Croûton and so on)



  30. The European Patent Office Does Not Care About the Law, Today's Management Constantly Attempts to Bypass the Law

    Many EPs (European Patents) are actually "IPs" (invalid patents); the EPO doesn't seem to care and it is again paying for corrupt scholars to toe the party line


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