IP lawyer turns patent foe, gets grant funding

[Posted November 4, 2003 by ris]

From:		bruce-AT-perens.com (Bruce Perens)
To:		bruce-AT-perens.com
Subject:		IP lawyer turns patent foe, gets grant funding
Date:		Mon, 3 Nov 2003 12:14:00 -0800

Hi Press List folks,

Here's an interesting story that I've seen no coverage of as yet. Dan
Ravicher used to be an intellectual property attorney at Patterson Belknap
and Tyner, a prestigious NY City law firm. He left the firm to pursue
challenging abuses of the patent system, and got grant funding to do
that. His phone and email are at the end of the release.

	Thanks

	Bruce Perens

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Public Patent Foundation Receives Seed Funding, Begins Operations

Executive Director Named One of World's 'Best Emerging Social Entrepreneurs'

Contact:

Daniel Ravicher, Executive Director, Public Patent Foundation
Phone: 917-843-3425
Email: dan-AT-pubpat.org
Web Site: www.pubpat.org.

NEW YORK - The New York City-based Public Patent Foundation, a non-profit
organization aimed at protecting individuals and small businesses from the
negative effects of the patent system, has begun operations with the
assistance of seed financing provided by the global social venture fund
Echoing Green.

Daniel Ravicher, Founder of the Public Patent Foundation and a registered
patent attorney, was named by Echoing Green as one of the world's "Best
Emerging Social Entrepreneurs" for his campaign against patents that harm
the public health, impinge civil liberties, and impair free markets.

According to Ravicher, roughly half of all patents in the United States are
illegitimate, meaning they should have never been granted. Illegitimate
patents restrict the availability of critical medications to the public and
deprive small businesses in information technology industries of fair
opportunities to compete in the marketplace. Utilizing legal action,
advocacy and public education strategies, the Public Patent Foundation will
work to expose and neutralize illegitimate patents through various
mechanisms, including filing requests with the U.S. Patent and Trademark
Office to have such patents revoked. Prominent law professors from Columbia,
Georgetown and Stanford law schools have already pledged support for the
organization.

"Most people do not realize how significantly illegitimate patents are
assailing their health, their freedoms, and their wallets," Ravicher, 28,
said. "The Public Patent Foundation will close this information gap and
represent the interests of the public on patent issues."

Through the Public Patent Foundation, Ravicher will launch an education
campaign regarding patents and implement various strategies for alleviating
the harms caused by patents. Ultimately, the Public Patent Foundation will
offer patent legal services to economically disadvantaged businesses and
individuals, prepare and file amicus briefs in important patent cases, and
establish a patent commons through which patents are made available to the
public on favorable terms.

"Eliminating illegitimate patents will save the general public billions of
dollars by removing barriers to competition in the marketplace for formerly
patent-protected goods," says Ravicher. "Raising awareness of the patent
system's devastating effects will promote dialogue and encourage support for
reforming the system."
Ravicher received a bachelor's degree in materials science magna cum laude
from the University of South Florida and a law degree from the University of
Virginia School of Law, where he also received the Public Service Award.
Prior to founding the Public Patent Foundation, Ravicher practiced patent
law with Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, Brobeck, Phleger &
Harrison, LLP, and Patterson, Belknap, Webb & Tyler, LLP, all in New York.
Throughout his career, Ravicher has performed hundreds of hours of pro bono
legal services for individuals, nonprofit organizations, and small
businesses.

"Our goal is to preserve, protect, and promote the rights of the general
public to have goods available in the marketplace without encumbrance from
illegitimate patents and unsound patent policy," said Ravicher. "We want to
provide the public with an understanding of and a voice in the process."

to post comments

patent commons?

Posted Nov 4, 2003 7:15 UTC (Tue) by stevenj (guest, #421) [Link] (6 responses)

[...] establish a patent commons through which patents are made available to the public on favorable terms.

Sigh... Why do we keep hearing this idea? If you want to make an idea available to the public, just publish it; then it can't be patented (in theory). There are even ways to submit ideas to the patent office directly to make sure they will be included in the prior-art database, but it costs $100-$200, I believe. Compare that to the cost of getting a patent, which typically runs into thousands of dollars, at least.

patent commons?

Posted Nov 4, 2003 7:18 UTC (Tue) by stevenj (guest, #421) [Link] (2 responses)

Unless what they mean is to convince companies to donate their patents to the public, which would be nice except that it's hard to believe it will happen.

patent commons?

Posted Nov 4, 2003 8:19 UTC (Tue) by TheOneKEA (guest, #615) [Link] (1 responses)

You never know. If these folks know what they're doing and they make it pretty clear to the patent holders that they would be better off donating the patent to the public, they might just do it.

patent commons?

Posted Nov 4, 2003 11:20 UTC (Tue) by sanjoy (subscriber, #5026) [Link]

Patent commons could have benefits like the GPL ("tough love" rather the "free love" of BSD licenses).

Companies or members of the public could license patents from the commons as long as derivative patents go into the pool, on the same terms. The commons would grow, as has the pool of GPL software, increasing the benefit to agree to its terms.

Companies already make such arrangements privately. AT&T and IBM would license their patent portfolios to each other. Each had large enough portfolios that it was worth it to the other. The deal also meant that outsiders had to compete against the combined patent pool, so had no chance (as an example of how patents "promote" innovation, long ago AT&T used the patents system to delay the development of radio). A useful and legal anti-competition tactic.

During World War 2, Standard Oil of New Jersey (now Exxon) and I.G. Farben of Nazi fame used patent pools to divide up world markets in synthetic rubber and high-octane aviation gasoline, to the detriment of the US war effort. The US government could do little about it since it needed Standard's gasoline and oil for the war (Standard had the government over a barrel).

Probably the public would be better off with no patents at all, as it would be with no copyright at all (except perhaps the requirement to give credit). However, as long as copyright exists, the GPL is useful; and as long as patents exist, patent commons will be useful.

patent commons?

Posted Nov 4, 2003 16:05 UTC (Tue) by gnb (subscriber, #5132) [Link] (1 responses)

>If you want to make an idea available to the public, just publish it; then it can't be
>patented (in theory).
But of course in practice it can and will be, since the notion of prior art is basically
lost on the US Patent Office. And once that happens most people/companies won't
have the resources to challenge it.

patent commons?

Posted Nov 4, 2003 19:01 UTC (Tue) by JoeBuck (guest, #2330) [Link]

I've read that a patent examiner only gets about 25 working hours, tops, to examine a patent, as they don't have the staffing to handle the volume of patent applications. What this means is that when they check "prior art" they mainly check prior patents.

May be a good move

Posted Nov 4, 2003 19:09 UTC (Tue) by libra (guest, #2515) [Link]

All the discussion here reminds me a comment I posted here more thant a month ago. You can read it somewhere there : http://lwn.net/Articles/50443/ though you may find it rather long.
I just hope that what is going on now will have the positive effects I was expecting when I wrote my little contribution.

IP lawyer turns patent foe, gets grant funding

Posted Nov 4, 2003 10:55 UTC (Tue) by DeletedUser16361 ((unknown), #16361) [Link]

I'm Red HAt and give me your money hahaha

IP lawyer turns patent foe, gets grant funding

Posted Nov 4, 2003 13:50 UTC (Tue) by cpm (guest, #3554) [Link]

To me it's very simple.

Put an end to corporate ownership of patents and
copyrights. Set things back to individual ownership
as it should be, and most of the problems quickly
disappear.