HAVING just written about violations of the EPC at the European Patent Office (EPO), let's look at similar abuses at today's USPTO, which disregards Federal Circuit decisions and besieges the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), the equivalent (more or less) of EPO's BoA.
"We foresaw this all along, even before he got the job."Mr. Iancu gleefully violating the laws that govern the Office doesn't surprise us. We foresaw this all along, even before he got the job. We had been writing about this for over a year.
Watchtroll, its striking lack of any comments lately and its connections to Iancu notwithstanding (those too are well documented), has just published "Iancu Highlights U.S. Role in the Future of Innovation in Remarks at U.S. Chamber’s [COC] Global IP Index Reception". Gene Quinn of Watchtroll basically reveals that Iancu now revels in the presence of this crooked bunch. He is aligning with corrupt COC. Surprising? No. Remember who he got this job from; it was crooked Trump. He got this job after his firm had worked for Trump (hallmark of corruption) and now he is serving the litigation 'industry' rather than the Office he works 'for' (similar to the pattern of FCC, EPA and so on).
"How typical of these people, who routinely attack judges for their decisions (Quinn has a long and extensive track record doing just that)."What does COC say? Well, the usual. But rather than amplify the lies, as the corporate press around the world has done over the past week, let's just say that it's the same as what we saw before, e.g. [1, 2, 3]. It's lobbying for patent trolls' interests. "Following are remarks delivered by United States Patent and Trademark Office Director Andrei Iancu at the event, after being introduced by GIPC President and CEO," Quinn wrote. He also typed up some nonsense titled "The ‘Iancu Effect’ Won’t Matter if Not Supported by the Courts or Congress" (the ‘Iancu Effect’?!). So basically they say that the USPTO can just disregard the law ("Courts or Congress") and the expectation is that lobbying by COC et al can change what "Courts or Congress" do. How typical of these people, who routinely attack judges for their decisions (Quinn has a long and extensive track record doing just that). They also attack politicians rather crudely for 'daring' (or finding the courage) to promote science and technology rather than patent trolls.
"Iancu is already angering groups that are supported by technology firms."Sadly, we live in bizarre times when agencies tasked with regulation actually do the exact opposite or what they were supposed to do. The USPTO is becoming just that under Iancu's oversight. It tarnishes the reputation of the USPTO in the same way Ajit Pai destroys what's left of the FCC and various people do at the EPA. There are many other examples like these across the US government. The likes of COC are allowed to toy around with public policy and the same goes for the Koch Brothers. COC's index is based on self-serving lies and a couple of weeks ago a Wall Street press apparatus also perpetuated the myth that innovation happens or exists only when there are patents (expensive; large companies can get lots of bogus ones). What is the goal of today's USPTO? Does it not realise that there's a crisis of confidence in US patents due to a torrent of false grants (those that had been granted over the past decade or two)?
Iancu is already angering groups that are supported by technology firms. "The @uspto proposal is an example of the agency putting its thumb on the scale in favor of #patent applicants at the expense of the public,” United for Patent Reform wrote this week, linking to the EFF's recent piece about Iancu. There's a new article from Joe Mullin/EFF video about "How Justus Decher Beat a Patent Troll". It was published yesterday and said:
Thousands of patent lawsuits are filed each year, and most of them deal with computer technology and software. Nearly 90 percent of those high-tech patent lawsuits are filed by shell companies that offer the public no products or services whatsoever. These patent-assertion entities, also known as “patent trolls,” simply enrich their owners by extracting money from operating companies.
In recent years, the Supreme Court has limited patent venue abuses, made fee-shifting easier, and most importantly, made it easier to throw out bad software patents in its Alice v. CLS Bank decision.
Patent troll lawsuits hurt real small businesses owned by regular people, most of whom don’t have the millions of dollars that would be required to defend themselves through a patent trial. We created our “Saved by Alice” project to tell their stories—the stories of company founders and entrepreneurs, who were able to keep on innovating because of the Alice decision.
"It won't mean a comeback of software patents but of bogus ones."Want to stop a patent troll and make money at the same time? Unified Patents is looking to leverage prior art rather than 35 U.S.C. ۤ 101/Alice (SCOTUS) against a troll. In its own words (half a day ago), it is "seeking prior art for US 7,010,508 owned by and asserted by Landmark Technology, LLC, a well-known NPE." There's a thousand-buck award.
The bottom line is, many bogus patents are still being granted by the USPTO and rather than improve patent quality Iancu is seeking to lower quality even further. That would, as we argued a month ago, cause a crisis of confidence. It won't mean a comeback of software patents but of bogus ones. ⬆