Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

United States Transitions To A 'First-Inventor-To-File' Patent System

forbes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 80 posts

Re: United States Transitions To A 'First-Inventor-To-File' Patent System

#21

Post by jbondeson »

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #17
hmottestad wrote: post #9

I remember an article about SpaceX where Musk said that they didn't file many patents, because then other countries essentially had free access to their inventions if they didn't honour patents (China was mentioned). With this change in law, they may no longer have protection against a patent filed by someone else that they (SpaceX) invented first...simply because they were not the first to file. This may bring about…

> they may no longer have protection against a patent filed by someone else that they (SpaceX) invented first // They only had a very limited protection before. First year of use, only shown in public in certified trade shows IIRC. This is how patents work, they require publication to enrich the knowledge pool and the return for that publication is time-limited government granted monopoly. If SpaceX can demonstrate p…

You are incorrect. Trade Secret laws and prior continuous use protect SpaceX very well if someone were to swoop in and patent a technology they use.

It wouldn't necessarily prevent a patent from being obtained, but it would protect SpaceX from being found in violation. I know this from first hand experience.

Re: United States Transitions To A 'First-Inventor-To-File' Patent System

#22

Post by scotty79 »

GotAnyMegadeth wrote: post #2

I don't really understand who benefits from this change? Doesn't everyone lose?

Lawyers benefit. It'll be cheaper to extort. You don't have to be afraid that someone else comes and proves that he invented this first. Owning a patent becomes almost risk free goldmine.

Also more this will lead to more patents because you have to patent to avoid someone else patenting your stuff bit later and extorting money from you.

Also more patents means more cannon fodder for lawyers for use in future extortions.

Re: United States Transitions To A 'First-Inventor-To-File' Patent System

#24

Post by bediger4000 »

rplnt wrote: post #16
Nursie wrote: post #6

I'd rather transition to a system where if two people try to file for the same thing within a few months or a year of each other, neither one gets it because it's probably pretty obvious.

What if both of them put real effort (money) into research and arrived at similar/same place? Should it be dismissed as well? Or is there something as joint patent?

I think in that case, the answer is "too bad, so sad". The patent system shouldn't guarantee some kind of monetary reward. If it does, it sets up the wrong incentives.

Independent invention should be a sign that the idea isn't worth patenting, that it was "in the air" at the time.

Re: United States Transitions To A 'First-Inventor-To-File' Patent System

#25

Post by bediger4000 »

GotAnyMegadeth wrote: post #2

I don't really understand who benefits from this change? Doesn't everyone lose?

To my mind, "first to file" removes some of the moral basis of patents. That is, even if someone invented something first, whoever gets to the PTO first gets rewarded with ownership of the idea. We've taken away the reward that should be given to the First Inventor based on that sacred, difficult act of Creation.

Re: United States Transitions To A 'First-Inventor-To-File' Patent System

#26

Post by Gormo »

bediger4000 wrote: post #25
GotAnyMegadeth wrote: post #2

I don't really understand who benefits from this change? Doesn't everyone lose?

To my mind, "first to file" removes some of the moral basis of patents. That is, even if someone invented something first, whoever gets to the PTO first gets rewarded with ownership of the idea. We've taken away the reward that should be given to the First Inventor based on that sacred, difficult act of Creation.

There is no "moral basis" for patents: they're entirely a creation of positive law, which generates an artificial monopoly in an inherently non-rival good, for the explicit purpose of "promot[ing] the Progress of Science and useful Arts". No "sacred, difficult act of Creation" is recognized, nor has ever been recognized, as the source of patent law.

Re: United States Transitions To A 'First-Inventor-To-File' Patent System

#27

Post by rogueriver »

1. My gripes with our patent, and trademark system comes down to fees.

2. I draft all my own patents(only 1), and found the process difficult, but doable. I also filed my own trademark.

3. I did have an issue with the filing fees. I contacted the offices involved and complained about the fees. I felt the fees might prevent many young inventors fron protecting their invention, or trademark.

4. They told me their was some programs for low income individuals, but I couldn't kind anything. The fees for filing a patent should be based on what a person makes?

Re: United States Transitions To A 'First-Inventor-To-File' Patent System

#28

Post by pc86 »

bediger4000 wrote: post #24
rplnt wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if both of them put real effort (money) into research and arrived at similar/same place? Should it be dismissed as well? Or is there something as joint patent?

I think in that case, the answer is "too bad, so sad". The patent system shouldn't guarantee some kind of monetary reward. If it does, it sets up the wrong incentives. Independent invention should be a sign that the idea isn't worth patenting, that it was "in the air" at the time.

> The patent system shouldn't guarantee some kind of monetary reward. If it does, it sets up the wrong incentives.

They don't, unless people use it and the patent holder wants to charge for licensing.

Re: United States Transitions To A 'First-Inventor-To-File' Patent System

#29

Post by Nursie »

rogueriver wrote: post #27

1. My gripes with our patent, and trademark system comes down to fees. 2. I draft all my own patents(only 1), and found the process difficult, but doable. I also filed my own trademark. 3. I did have an issue with the filing fees. I contacted the offices involved and complained about the fees. I felt the fees might prevent many young inventors fron protecting their invention, or trademark. 4. They told me their was s…

The fees are a deliberate barrier.

The patent office must get funding from somewhere. If the fees don't at least mostly cover their staffing and research needs then huge companies that file a lot become a huge financial burden on the taxpayer, and the taxpayer is then paying for a business advantage for these companies.

Obviously this sucks for the small inventor. I'm not sure how you get around it. The first X a year are free? But then the patents are always filed in individual names and then assigned to the company anyway, so I'm not sure that works.

Re: United States Transitions To A 'First-Inventor-To-File' Patent System

#30

Post by Daniel_Newby »

jbondeson wrote: post #21
pbhjpbhj wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they may no longer have protection against a patent filed by someone else that they (SpaceX) invented first // They only had a very limited protection before. First year of use, only shown in public in certified trade shows IIRC. This is how patents work, they require publication to enrich the knowledge pool and the return for that publication is time-limited government granted monopoly. If SpaceX can demonstrate p…

You are incorrect. Trade Secret laws and prior continuous use protect SpaceX very well if someone were to swoop in and patent a technology they use. It wouldn't necessarily prevent a patent from being obtained, but it would protect SpaceX from being found in violation. I know this from first hand experience.

How does that work? The whole point is that the first filer wins regardless of prior invention.
Post reply on HN