What You Need to Know About the New Patent Law - watkinsworick

The America Invents Act has been widely described as the biggest regenerate of American letters patent law in some 50 years, and that's for certain admittedly. An overhaul of our patent system was long overdue, and there have been high hopes as to what it could accomplish.

At once that the Act has been signed into law, however, there's increasing realization that IT doesn't do nearly enough. Some provisions are a tread in the right direction, without doubt, but happening the whole the legislating is a pale phantom of what it should have been, and with around possibly harmful inclusions to boot–specially for small businesses.

How wish it bear upon you? You can be foreordained it volition, at to the lowest degree indirectly. Here's a summary of some of the key points you should be cognizant of.

1. 'First to File'

Certainly the most obvious change made by this new legislation is that from directly on patents will be granted to whichever company files for the patent first. This is in contrast with our former "first to invent" system, whereby inventors had to prove–frequently via a protracted legal battle–that they were the low gear one to total up with the mind.

Pro: This bequeath certainly go far quicker and simpler to decide who should receive the patent; IT's also more in accordance with the way things oeuvre in many other parts of the world. For those unable to file a plangent application quickly, in that location's as wel the possibleness of filing a more limited "provisional application" that can serve every bit a placeholder for up to 12 months, as Washington and Lee University economics professor Alan C. Marco recently pointed out.

Goldbrick: In the long run it will still likely favor big companies with the staff and resources to get patent applications in quickly, putt smaller companies and individual inventors at a relative disadvantage.

2. 'Micro Entity' Status

A special "micro entity" status included in the new law will benefit individual inventors. Specifically, for inventors with fewer than quintet previous patent applications and a limited family income, among other requirements, the law reduces the fees required to file a patent by some 75 percent, atomic number 3 California patent lawyer Andrew Schroeder recently pointed out.

Pro: A clear financial benefit for modification inventors.

Con: Only that you must meet a fairly detailed set of requirements to be included.

3. No Tangible Change on Software

Of decisive importance to those of us in the information technology industry are software patents, which I've long opposed. While this reclaim could have been a great time to deal with this problematic issue, that didn't go on. Only two narrow niches–financial products and tax strategies–are addressed in a minor way, only nothing broader is included to fix the problem overall.

Pro: Patents are limited Oregon clarified slightly in two narrowly definite byplay niches.

Victimize: Overall, the on-going software unobstructed debacle continues unchanged, and that can only damage flyspeck developers.

4. Evident Trolls Unabated

Relatedly, the America Invents Act does nothing to throttl the amends that can glucinium sought in a patent lawsuit, and it also doesn't address the harm done by letters patent trolls ilk Lodsys, which suffer get on a scourge on the software industry, especially.

"We hope legislators South Korean won't treat the handing over of patent regenerate legislating in 2022 equally an excuse to ignore the growing troll problem, which stymies innovation, hurting individual inventors, small businesses, and our thriftiness at giant," writes the Electronic Frontier Foundation's (EFF's) Julie Samuels.

In favou: There isn't one, exclude for patent trolls.

Con: With the continuing motivation of enthusiastically jural rewards, these trolls will stay on to be a problem for companies whopping and small.

5. Zero Limit on 'Forum Shopping'

There's a argue soh many a tech-related patent lawsuits have been filed in the Eastern District of Texas, and that's that it is widely known to be unusually patent-friendly. This new law does nothing to limit the power of trolls and others to pick where they file their lawsuits in the hopes of more golden results.

Pro: None, except for trolls and the Eastern District of Texas.

Yard bird: Leaves other part of the troll and case problem unaddressed.

6. Fee Setting Authority

Up until now, Sexual relation has been in lodge of setting the fees charged by the letters patent office, and it has diverted very much of those funds–some $900 billion terminated the days–toward other purposes. While Congress will still have some say in this area, the USPTO has been granted more authority to set its own fees and keep more of what it collects.

Pro: This volition surely provide a much-needed tax income boost for the Patent and Trademark Office Database–one that should avail it tackle the monumental backlog of applications waiting for examination.

Con: The revenue encouragement isn't As big as it should comprise since Sexual intercourse will stillness living control of some of the money. Another consequence, Eastern Samoa noted earlier this calendar month by Ars Technica's Timothy B. Lee, is that it may be tempting for the Patent Office to be more than lenient in its granting of patents so American Samoa to increase the numeral of future applications and–along the way–its own revenues.

7. Challenging Invalid Patents

Last, through a new "post-grant recapitulation" process, the new legislation offers a new opportunity to challenge bad patents. That for certain sounds like a good matter; the only trouble is the way it was implemented, as the EFF notes.

Professional: There's no dubiousness we need better slipway to get bad patents invalidated–there are far too many in existence today–and this could help to a limited extent.

Con: "These procedures offer hardly a practical chances for ordinary people World Health Organization wear't constantly monitor the Patent Office," writes the EFF's Samuels. Strict time limits connected these challenges, in particular, mean that constant vigilance is required in order to challenge a patent in time to be considered. Erst over again, only the big guys with their well-paid legal staffs will likely be able to do this quickly enough, putting itsy-bitsy businesses at a disadvantage once again.

IT's certainly a good thing that the call for for patent reform has been recognized; there's teensy argumentation about that. But what got signed into law this time fair-and-square doesn't come finale to doing enough. Let's hope the drive continues for a more sane and balanced system that doesn't reward the monoliths and trolls or impede the little guys rather then much.

Source: https://www.pcworld.com/article/476716/new_patent_law_offers_few_pros_many_cons.html

Posted by: watkinsworick.blogspot.com

Share this post