I'm honestly not sure that first-to-file vs invent is really that huge of a deal. The bigger issues in this bill appear to be the changes in grace period (bad) and the changes in the ability to challenge patents (good).
House Bill for Patent Office Reform Nearly Finished
11–20 of 28 posts
Re: House Bill for Patent Office Reform Nearly Finished
#12"The bill generally updates the process for challenging patents and would change the patent system to one thatawards a patent to the first inventor to file a specific claim. Currently, the first person to invent something has patent priority, whether or not he is the first to file an application." First to file trumps first to invent? That sounds awful and a step backwards.
Indeed! Now people would have motivation to file even the most obvious of the ideas they have so that someone else cannot file it later and sue them!
Re: House Bill for Patent Office Reform Nearly Finished
#13"The bill generally updates the process for challenging patents and would change the patent system to one thatawards a patent to the first inventor to file a specific claim. Currently, the first person to invent something has patent priority, whether or not he is the first to file an application." First to file trumps first to invent? That sounds awful and a step backwards.
"First to file" was put in to bring US law into alignment with the rest of the world, not that I think it is a particularly good idea.
Re: House Bill for Patent Office Reform Nearly Finished
#14Doesn't look like they are working on the real problems at all, and are instead creating others. First person to invent won't matter, only who pays the fee first? UGH. Way to discourage innovation and encourage patent trolls. With that they'll be able to watch new products on the market and try to file patents on everything, then sue the person who actually invented it.
> they'll be able to watch new products on the market and try to file patents on everything, then sue the person who actually invented it No, they won't. If something was on the market before you filed, you are not entitled to a patent. That's how prior art and statutory bars work.
FTA:
> The bill generally updates the process for challenging patents and would change the patent system to one that awards a patent to the first inventor to file a specific claim.
> Currently, the first person to invent something has patent priority, whether or not he is the first to file an application.
That sounds to me as if they are eliminating, or at least weakening, the idea of prior art preventing the award of a patent. Scary.
Of course, this was written by a journalist, not a patent expert, so who knows what the real situation is. But it's still scary.
Re: House Bill for Patent Office Reform Nearly Finished
#15So it appears as if they're about to create a fund that they can appropriate to whatever cause they want instead of the underfunded patent office. Great... That's what they've done to infrastructure funds in many states.
Re: House Bill for Patent Office Reform Nearly Finished
#16"The bill generally updates the process for challenging patents and would change the patent system to one thatawards a patent to the first inventor to file a specific claim. Currently, the first person to invent something has patent priority, whether or not he is the first to file an application." First to file trumps first to invent? That sounds awful and a step backwards.
I think it's more like a step sideways. The main issue with patents right now is the low bar for new patents, and this bill doesn't seem to alleviate the problem.
Re: House Bill for Patent Office Reform Nearly Finished
#17Earlier quoted context omitted.
> they'll be able to watch new products on the market and try to file patents on everything, then sue the person who actually invented it No, they won't. If something was on the market before you filed, you are not entitled to a patent. That's how prior art and statutory bars work.
FTA: > The bill generally updates the process for challenging patents and would change the patent system to one that awards a patent to the first inventor to file a specific claim. > Currently, the first person to invent something has patent priority, whether or not he is the first to file an application. That sounds to me as if they are eliminating, or at least weakening, the idea of prior art preventing the award o…
Prior art is still prior art. What this particular element changes is basically the situation where two people independently come up with the same idea, and they both file for patents. (I'm leaving out some irrelevant complications, but) under current law, whoever came up with the idea first wins, even if the later inventor files first. Under this new law, whoever filed first would win, even if he had the idea later. It's to save the trouble of having to litigate about when you had an idea, what proof you have of that fact, etc.
But it doesn't change the fact that you can't patent an idea that you stole from someone else.
Re: House Bill for Patent Office Reform Nearly Finished
#18The bill generally updates the process for challenging patents and would change the patent system to one that awards a patent to the first inventor to file a specific claim.
Currently, the first person to invent something has patent priority, whether or not he is the first to file an application.
Wow, after 6 years of careful discussions and deliberations, they've finally figured out a way to make the patent trolling situation even worse. Good job, pat on the back!
Re: House Bill for Patent Office Reform Nearly Finished
#19Can we please stop calling the vivisection of the patent system "reform"? That is just what congress is calling it to make the ideas more palatable. I have contacted my congressman asking him to fight this, and I believe you should too. First to invent is what makes our system unique, and is what gives small inventors a chance to compete against patent farms like IBM.
Re: House Bill for Patent Office Reform Nearly Finished
#20"The bill generally updates the process for challenging patents and would change the patent system to one thatawards a patent to the first inventor to file a specific claim. Currently, the first person to invent something has patent priority, whether or not he is the first to file an application." First to file trumps first to invent? That sounds awful and a step backwards.
That all depends on exactly what the bill says.
It could make prior art irrelevant (huge step backwards, but I think unlikely). Alternatively, it could leave prior art intact. In which case, if party B patents something party A invented a short time before, and someone can prove this, then nobody gets the patent. Party A's invention is prior art to party B's patent.
Under the current system, party A would get the patent.
edit: Tracked down the bill text. I am not a lawyer; this is not legal advice; read it yourself and make your own opinions: http://www.opencongress.org/bill/112-h1249/text
(a) Novelty; Prior Art- A person shall be entitled to a
patent unless--
‘(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in
a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or
otherwise available to the public before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention; or
‘(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent
issued under section 151, or in an application for patent
published or deemed published under section 122(b), in
which the patent or application, as the case may be,
names another inventor and was effectively filed before
the effective filing date of the claimed invention.