THE USPTO has created a toxic environment for small businesses (and to a lesser degree medium- and large-sized businesses too) in the United States. In this new letter/column, published only yesterday, the author bemoans the current state of affairs:

Businesses large and small are unexpectedly receiving letters demanding money for alleged patent infringement.

"It leads to a false consensus, shaped for the most part by patent lawyers and other people who profit from the broken status quo."This is not a bad interpretation/opinion, even though it focuses on patent trolls rather than patent scope (software patents for instance). There is clearly dissatisfaction with this state of affairs, but people from the USPTO shut their ears and pretend that everything is great. Last month we showed how David Kappos, the former head of the USPTO, became rather delusional because he is stuck in the echo chamber of patent lawyers and is now profiting from it (directly). Now we see the lobbyists' favourite newspaper, The Hill, saying that "Attacks on patent system are unfounded" (that is the headline). Guess who wrote it... someone from an "intellectual property group" and the USPTO's "former commissioner for patents". No conflict of interests there? He pretends all fine and dandy at the USPTO and generally resists change. Quoting his own disclosure in full: "Stoll is a partner and co-chair of the intellectual property group at Drinker Biddle & Reath and a former commissioner for patents at the United States Patent and Trademark Office."

Why are so many voices weighing in on these matters not scientists and people who actually apply for patents? Or people who actually create stuff (without necessarily applying for patents)? It leads to a false consensus, shaped for the most part by patent lawyers and other people who profit from the broken status quo.

“If readers thought witnessing the Unified Patent Court legislative package wheedle its way through European legislation was fun...”
      --AmeriKatHere in Europe we are seeing more or less the same thing. "We are currently witnessing some patent owners enforcing their patent rights exclusively using the European courts," wrote some US patent lawyers (this is a site of patent lawyers and vocal software patents proponents), referring to patent trolls that attack Europe as just "patent owners". These people also want the UPC, as one can imagine, because it can help patent lawyers make more money, also from the US (they can sue or issue cross-continental injunctions). "Now with the Unified Patent Court on the horizon," the author wrote, as if it is inevitable. Well, the EPO sure wants and lobbies for the UPC, which means more money and power to the EPO (at the expense of ordinary European citizens). It often seems like Europe allows itself to be the vassal not just of other countries but mostly corporations (not just European), with passage of TPP, potentially UPC, and perhaps yet more secret deals and laws that serve nobody except big businesses.

"If readers thought witnessing the Unified Patent Court legislative package wheedle its way through European legislation was fun," wrote this longtime proponent of the UPC (so-called 'IP' lawyer, going by the pseudonym AmeriKat) just hours ago, "they will equally enjoy the saga of the draft EU Trade Secrets Directive proposed by the European Commission."

It would be "fun" to "enjoy" only if one is sadistic, or an 'IP' lawyer perhaps.

Yes, well, at least we now know where we are heading if we continue to allow this whole 'public' debate to be managed by supposedly benevolent wolves, promising to guard misinformed or uninformed sheep. Practitioners in software and other disciplines need to rise up and speak up, or else things will only get worse. Patent examiners too needs to examine the impact of their work on society; who is ultimately being helped when large monopolists get the fast lane at the EPO? Who is this whole system really for? ⬆