This page permanently redirects to gemini://gemini.techrights.org/2019/06/11/lowering-the-legal-certainty/.
Posted in America, Europe, Patents at 12:10 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
The rush to promote software patents completely overlooks the fact that courts keep rejecting them
Summary: Law firms that are accustomed to making money from low-quality and abstract patents try to overcome barriers by bribing politicians; this will backfire because they show sheer disregard for the patent system’s integrity and merely lower the legal certainty associated with granted (by greedy offices) patents
Funded by patent litigation firms, the glorified bill which patent maximalists promoted last week is already a thing of the past. Just like last year and the year prior to that. It’s like an annual ritual and this time it’s marketed as “bipartisan” because there are two (a couple) politicians from ‘opposing’ corporate parties behind it; they’re not from oppositing sectors/interests, just a different letter on their lapel (the D/R duopoly). They’re buying laws (but will fail, yet again, as before) by stacking panels and putting together a show.
=> like last year and the year prior to that
“They’re buying laws (but will fail, yet again, as before) by stacking panels and putting together a show.”Judging by reactions in patent maximalists’ blogs, we can more or less tell that expectations are low. They give it a shot, but even they realise that those Senate hearings were stacked. In “Two Observations on Last Week’s Senate Hearings on Patent Eligibility Reform” Gene Quinn (Watchtroll) has just said that the status quo is a “disaster”. He’s right. A disaster to patent trolls and parasitic law firms like his…
What they cannot deny, however, is that firms that actually produce things like the status quo a lot better and fully support AIA.
Senate members (other than Coons and his sidekick) can just look who’s promoting the Coons coup (bill): literally the lobby groups of patent trolls and the politicians funded by their law firms. It’s a form of corruption or bribery, but they prefer calling that “campaign contributions”. Of course Michael Rosen of the American Enterprise Institute (a front group for extremists like Trump and platform for patent trolls) has just backed this Coons coup — a coup against the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) and 35 U.S.C. § 101. Seeing that inter partes reviews (IPRs) invalidate a lot of software parents, they just had to say something. Rosen had done this for years, typically citing the Koch ‘scholars’. Bought, paid-for bills won’t go very far. Who took the bill (invoice)? Follow the money of Coons. He has just hit the lobbyists’ media and tweets that cite Coons are patent maximalists’. He’s also boosted and amplified by patent trolls’ front groups such as IAM (e.g. here and here). Not a single productive company is supporting this. As the CCIA put it in a tweet a few days ago: “The guy whose patents were invalidated in Alice thinks this is a bad, overbroad bill.”
=> ↺ has just backed | ↺ hit the lobbyists’ media | ↺ tweets that cite Coons are patent maximalists’ | ↺ here | ↺ here | ↺ put it in a tweet a few days ago
“…European Patents have got one heck of a crisis; the courts keep rejecting them again and again.”The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is already attempting to water down or ignore 35 U.S.C. § 101; that would have no impact on courts however. There are a couple new cases (in our daily links) wherein Federal Circuit judges throw out software patents. Nothing has changed!
=> ↺ USPTO | ↺ Federal Circuit
Over here in Europe nothing is changing either, not at the courts anyway. Sure, there are software patents in Europe (wrongly granted by the EPO), but they won’t withstand judges’ scrutiny. Yesterday the EPO wrote:
=> ↺ software patents in Europe | ↺ EPO wrote
Nearly 18 000 patent applications relating to self-driving vehicle technologies have been filed with the EPO in the last decade, almost 4 000 of them in 2017 alone. More interesting findings on #patents and self-driving vehicles here: http://bit.ly/SDVstudy #SelfDriving
“Many of these (not all) are fake patents and bogus patent applications that should be rejected as software patents,” I responded, “but EPO will grant them anyway…”
As we shall show in our next post, European Patents have got one heck of a crisis; the courts keep rejecting them again and again. This mirrors much of what we see in the US (more so over the past few years).
On the subject of self-driving vehicles, mind this new article that says:
The need to promote innovation through open source software (OSS) and a desire to protect patent rights may be contradictory interests for businesses investing in artificial intelligence (AI) and autonomous driving
They interject the “AI” nonsense into it; those are software patents. Earlier this week an Israeli law firm and some other law firm showed that Israel (IPLO) may be trying to allow software patents under the guise of “HEY HI!” (AI) — the same kind of patents that the EPO elevated to Inventor Award “finalist” (an Israeli company which uses the term “AI”, as per the EPO). From the article: “It seems clear that, at this point, AI implemented inventions will be reviewed by the IPLO under the same rubric as software or computer-implemented inventions..”
=> ↺ trying to allow software patents
Notice the use of the term “computer-implemented inventions” (CII) and “AI”. The EPO helped popularise these lies. Some of these recent patents are on fictional/theoretical things. They’re designed mostly for hype and marketing — the idea that these cars are “safe” because of some patents and “HEY HI!” █
=> ↺ on fictional/theoretical things
Share in other sites/networks: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
Permalink Send this to a friend
=> Permalink | ↺ Send this to a friend
=> Techrights
➮ Sharing is caring. Content is available under CC-BY-SA.
text/gemini;lang=en-GBThis content has been proxied by September (ba2dc).