It's McCarthyism all over again [LWN.net]

It's McCarthyism all over again

Posted May 14, 2007 4:37 UTC (Mon) by salimma (subscriber, #34460)
In reply to: It's McCarthyism all over again by pr1268
Parent article: Microsoft takes on the free world (CNN)

Sadly, the way USPTO granted overly-broad patents without checking for prior art, Microsoft's claim is probably true in a very twisted way: nobody can write anything meaningful without violating some patent that one of the big tech companies (IBM, Sun, Microsoft, etc.) holds. The culprit is the patent system, not the author of the infringing software.

Regardless of whether software patents is a good idea or not (I personally think it's not), the USPTO and Congress have a serious conflict-of-interest problem here. Granting more patents earn them more money, and examining patent applications carefully cost them money. Plus, they don't lose anything for patents that are overturned. The Justice department should charge USPTO for the time wasted by patent challenges, if the patent ends up overturned because of USPTO's fault. That way they'd have an incentive to be more careful.

(Log in to post comments)

It's McCarthyism all over again

Posted May 15, 2007 10:36 UTC (Tue) by egoforth (subscriber, #2351) [Link]

This is one of the better patent reform suggestions that I've heard. Not that I'm holding out hope for any meaningful change, but it seems fairly straightforward and workable so long as there is some easily identifiable criteria to place blame. The charges could be done on a sliding scale based on the number of claims in a patent that are overturned, so that the costs increase with the amount of neglect.

costs

Posted May 19, 2007 22:33 UTC (Sat) by pdundas (subscriber, #15203) [Link]

A way to do that might be to make the US Patent Office liable for the legal costs of the successful challenger.

A company which made and defended the invalid patent (if they were shown to be knowingly - rather than, say, negligently - ignoring prior art) could also be liable for consequential loss by the challenger - delay to product launch, etc.