"Obvious" patent laws could become relaxed, tech firms rejoice

Lawsuits in the technology biz certainly aren't uncommon, and it looks like we may have one more significant ruling about to hit just shortly after CSIRO won its own landmark case. The US Supreme Court justices seem to be viewing earlier, lower cases with a hint of skepticism in regard to decisions that have previously worked to safeguard patented products. While the trial at hand concerns two brake manufacturers -- KSR International and rival Teleflex -- the stipulations could be far reaching; the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit previously ruled that KSR failed to prove that Teleflex (the accuser) "did not encounter teaching, suggestion, or motivation in developing the product." The generally ambiguous test is a thorn in the side of major technology companies getting slapped around by frivolous lawsuits, and Microsoft, IBM, and Cisco Systems have all made time to "submit briefs supporting KSR's stand." Still, the final decision isn't expected for quite some time, so sue-happy firms still have time to submit their counter-briefs, but folks like Vonage and TomTom (just to name a couple) would obviously (ahem) love a victory here.

[Via Slashdot]

[Henry @ Dec 1st 2006 8:25PM]

Are you talking about that gavel? I think you've got the wrong article here.

[toppgun @ Dec 1st 2006 8:58PM]

starting to use the fark.com tags i see

[Jon @ Dec 1st 2006 10:07PM]

"the stipulations could be far reaching"

Do you even know what you are talking about? The "stipulations" could be far reaching???? And it's "lower COURT cases"; not "lower cases" -- that refers to a letter. Cue Engadget/AOL editors to delete this comments as they usually do when you point out an actual error in their post.

[csnoke @ Dec 1st 2006 11:05PM]

A lot of inventions seem "obvious" after someone else comes up with the idea... I'm not sure that should be the standard.

[wrxracer @ Dec 2nd 2006 3:56AM]

You're right, that isn't the standard. The standard was set forth in Graham v. John Deere: the invention cannot be obvious to a person skilled in the useful art at the time the invention was created.

What is being argued in this case the secondary indicita of nonobviousness. Here, the quesiton is whether prior art (previous patents) teachs toward part of the invention.

For a more detailed explanation check out:
http://www.patentlyo.com/patent/
this is where most of us in the patent world go to dicuss.

http://www.patentlyo.com/patent/

[Ronald J Riley @ Dec 2nd 2006 9:19AM]

Washed up tech companies are looking for a license to steal others property. Actually their secret partners are the insurance and banking industries. Collectively they call themselves the Coalition for Patent Fairness. A more appropriate name for this group of intellectual property thieves is the Coalition for Patent Piracy.

The Coalition has four pillars of support.

1) Washed up tech companies who are well past their prime. While they started as innovative companies they are no longer able to produce significant inventions themselves, and arrogantly take others inventions. These are companies who were "high tech" two or three decades ago but today are just mercantile tech. These companies suffer the same problems as the auto industry, and while their ailment is not as advanced as the auto industry they will within a few decades suffer the same fate as the auto industry. PIAUSA would be happy to compare and contrast this issue for media.

2) Some of the members of the Coalition were never innovative, companies like Microsoft and Dell. Shrewd business people who are very good at profiting from other's inventions but definitely not the brightest bulbs in the pack.

3) The insurance industry, who are really put out that they have to pay innovators with business method patents. The insurance industry reminds me of protection rackets. They are really good at collecting premiums and even better at avoiding paying. Just look to Katrina victims for an example of the industry's immorality.

4) The banking industry, who is also put out that they have to pay innovators with business method patents. About the only thing the banking industry is good at inventing is ever larger and more outrageous fees. Americans who value job creation should shift their business to credit unions.

PIAUSA.org received intelligence some time ago that the "Coalition of Patent Piracy" had organized and hired two firms to feed media propaganda. We were told that each of the members had contributed a quarter of a million dollars to the cause of painting those they have victimized as evil patent trolls. That's over ten million dollars in propaganda. Media has been had by the Coalition's public relations machine. We have seen the results of that coalition's work over the past year. The Coalition knows no shame and as a result of their extreme and shrill positions on intellectual property they have become outcasts among most of corporate America.


Most Coalition members have reputations as predators on today's innovators, and as a result inventors take their inventions to other companies who have better reputations. Between patent pirates inability to invent themselves and their alienation of those who do invent it is inevitable that they will continue to stagnate.


Our legislators have recognized the value of promoting competitiveness and the role inventors play in promoting prosperity while failing to recognize the importance of inventors ability to enforce their patent rights. The single most important factor in America maintaining our standard of living in the face of global competition is our intellectual property. At the same time that we desperately need the jobs and tax base which inventors create the "Coalition for Patent Piracy" are using a disinformation campaign to promote changes to our laws undermining America's collective economic future for their own profit.

America's economy has always been driven by our inventiveness. In the past we have profited by making our inventions. Today both our foreign competitors and our own disloyal multinationals conspire to take our inventiveness for their own profit. It is a fact that intellectual property has become the most valuable commodity of global commerce. If America and other developed countries are to maintain our standard of living in the face of low wage global competition is is crucial that we protect our inventions and those who produce them from the Coalition for Patent Piracy's members. When a patent pirate gets away with taking an invention the damage goes far beyond what the inventor suffers. Americans lose jobs and tax base when patent pirates take American ingenuity to low wage countries.

I am a commercially successful independent inventor, founder of nonprofit www.InventorEd.org and founder of inventor trade association www.PIAUSA.org. I and my colleagues have devoted more than a decade to helping and organizing inventors to deal with corporate patent piracy.

George Santayana (1863�1952), U.S. philosopher and poet said "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." It is clear that this is a lesson that the Coalition for Patent Piracy has not learned. If they understood the history they would know that despite the best efforts of patent pirates to pass self serving "reform" throughout the 1990's they achieved little. The reason is that hired guns never have the same convictions or motivation which people who have been victimized have.
What are the true effects of so called Patent reform?

1) Increases the costs of small entity patent holders, often by at about two orders of magnitude.

2) Shifts costs from large corporate infringers to the small entity.

3) Opens new causes for large entities to litigate.

4) Will make our patent system subject to a multitude of patent system abuses common in Japan which very much favors big companies.

5) Delays the possibility of start-ups obtaining investment capital by effectively increasing pendency.

6) Increases the power and potential abuse of such power by the USPTO which has become increasingly politicized.

7) Lowers the potential recovery for a patentee by at least one to two orders of magnitude.

8) It will not decrease the role of attorneys or litigation, but rather will increase their role and legal expenses in a multitude of ways.

9) Will lead to much higher filing rates for patents which will further bog down the USPTO.

10) Allows foreign competitors to take American inventions with impunity. This will damage all American businesses.


====


The Professional Inventors Alliance USA was created more than a decade ago to protect American invention and encourage innovation. American inventors saw a need to track congressional legislation and federal policy that impacts independent inventors, small and medium-sized businesses and colleges and universities. The Alliance is the premiere organization in the nation, providing independent inventors a united voice in order to improve public policy.

The Alliance provides legislative counsel, congressional updates and strategy development to its members through a number of vehicles. Additionally, through its speaker�s bureau, Alliance members have an opportunity to provide expert opinion to many of the nation�s top-tier business, technology and mainstream media organizations. Over the years its members have testified before Congress, offered counsel to key Senate and House committee members, and successfully pushed legislation to protect America�s independent inventors.


Since its inception, the Alliance has grown into one of the most vocal advocates for America�s patent system.


Examples of areas of our expertise include David Vs. Goliath patent litigation, patent reform, and we have a unique view of the companies comprising the "Coalition for Patent Piracy".


COALITION FOR PATENT PIRACY MEMBERSHIP

Below is the latest list derived from a Coalition document which was sent to us of the Coalition for Patent Fairness. It always amazes me how fronts of not so reputable industry pick names which imply their goals are the opposite of reality. The G2 we have on this group is that they kicked in $250,000 each and hired two public relations firms to push their patent troll propaganda. That is peanuts compared to the billions of dollars they collectively appropriate.

Ronald J. Riley,

President - www.PIAUSA.org - RJR at PIAUSA.org
Executive Director - www.InventorEd.org - RJR at InvEd.org
Direct [phone] - 9 am to 9 pm EST.

====

The core group who created the Coalition are marked *
The founding members, joined in the first year or so are marked **

� Adobe
� Apple **
� Applied Materials
� Aruba Wireless Networks, Inc.
� Autodesk
� Avaya
� Business Software Alliance
� CA, Inc.
� Charter Communications
� Chevron Corporation
� Ciena Corporation
� Cisco Systems *
� Comcast
� Computer and Communications Industry Association
� Computing Technology Industry Association
� Countrywide Home Loans
� Dell *
� eBay
� Electrolux **
� Financial Services Roundtable
� Fortune Brands
� Hewlett-Packard **
� Information Technology Association of America
� Information Technology Industry Council (ITI)
� Intel *
� Intuit
� Juniper Networks
� Lexmark International
� MasterCard
� Micron Technology *
� Microsoft **
� NCR Corporation
� Nielsen Media Research, Inc.
� Oracle **
� Palm
� Red Hat
� Research In Motion **
� SAP
� Securities Industry Association
� Software and Information Industry Association
� Symantec
� TechNet
� Time Warner
� Visa
� Xilinx, Inc.


==== Associations ====

Associations:

Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA) is an international association of computer and communications firms.

Members:

http://www.ccianet.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=Members_List&file=index&POSTNUKESID=e18874967b9c16d9f6a8ec80105aa24b


Financial Services Roundtable www.fsround.org Member companies: http://www.fsround.org/membercos.html#FSRlogo

As listed on the Financial Services Roundtable link above:

ACE INA Holdings, Inc. Philadelphia PA

AEGON USA, Inc. Baltimore MD

Affiliated Managers Group, Inc. Prides Crossing MA

Allianz Life Insurance Company of North America

Minneapolis MN

Allied Capital Corporation Washington DC

The Allstate Corporation Northbrook IL

American Express Company New York NY

American General Financial Services, Inc./ING Evansville IN

AmSouth Bancorporation Birmingham AL

AON Corporation Chicago IL

Associated Banc-Corp Green Bay WI

Assurant, Inc. New York NY

AXA Financial, Inc. New York NY

BancorpSouth, Inc. Tupelo MS

BancWest Corporation Honolulu HI

Bank of America Corporation Charlotte NC

Bank of Hawaii Corporation Honolulu HI

The Bank of New York Company, Inc. New York NY

Barclays Capital, Inc. New York NY

BB&T Corporation Winston Salem NC

Capital One Financial Corporation Falls Church VA

The Charles Schwab Corporation San Francisco CA

The Chubb Corporation Warren NJ

Citigroup Inc. New York NY

Citizens Financial Group, Inc. Providence RI

City National Corporation Beverly Hills CA

Comerica Incorporated Detroit MI

Commerce Bancshares, Inc. Kansas City MO

Compass Bancshares Inc. Birmingham AL

Countrywide Financial Corporation Calabasas CA

Credit Suisse First Boston New York NY

Cullen/Frost Bankers, Inc. San Antonio TX

Edward Jones Saint Louis MO

Federated Investors, Inc. Pittsburgh PA

Fidelity Investments Boston MA

Fifth Third Bancorp Cincinnati OH

First Commonwealth Financial Corporation Indiana PA

First Horizon National Corporation Memphis TN

Ford Motor Credit Company Dearborn MI

Fulton Financial Corporation Lancaster PA

General Electric Company Stamford CT

GMAC Financial Services Detroit MI

Genworth Financial Richmond VA

Guaranty Financial Services Austin TX

H&R Block, Inc. Kansas City MO

Harris Bankcorp, Inc. Chicago IL

HSBC North America Holdings, Inc. Chicago IL

Huntington Bancshares Incorporated

Columbus OH

ING Atlanta GA

JPMorganChase & Co. New York NY

Jefferson-Pilot Corporation Greensboro NC

John Deere Credit Company Johnston IA

KeyCorp Cleveland OH

LaSalle Bank Corporation Chicago IL

Legg Mason, Inc. Baltimore MD

Lincoln National Corporation Chicago IL

M&T Bank Corporation Buffalo NY

Marshall & Ilsley Corporation Milwaukee WI

MassMutual Financial Group Springfield MA

MasterCard Incorporated Purchase NY

Mellon Financial Corporation Pittsburgh PA

Mercantile Bankshares Corporation Baltimore MD

Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc. New York NY

MetLife, Inc. New York NY

National City Corporation Cleveland OH

Nationwide Columbus OH

New Century Financial Corporation Irvine CA

Northern Trust Corporation Chicago IL

Old National Bancorp Evansville IN

The PNC Financial Services Group, Inc. Pittsburgh PA

Popular, Inc. San Juan PR

Principal Financial Group Des Moines IA

Prudential Financial Inc. Newark NJ

Raymond James Financial, Inc. Saint Petersburg FL

RBC Centura Banks, Inc. Rocky Mount NC

Regions Financial Corporation Birmingham AL

Sky Financial Group, Inc. Bowling Green OH

Sovereign Bancorp, Inc. Reading PA

State Farm Insurance Companies Bloomington IL

State Street Corporation Boston MA

SunTrust Banks, Inc. Atlanta GA

Synovus Financial Corp. Columbus GA

TD Banknorth Inc. Portland ME

TIAA-CREF New York NY

Toyota Motor Credit Corporation Torrance CA

U.S. Bancorp Minneapolis MN

UBS Stamford CT

UnionBanCal Corporation San Francisco CA

United Bankshares, Inc. Parkersburg WV

UnumProvident Chattanooga TN

USAA San Antonio TX

Wachovia Corporation Charlotte NC

Waddell & Reed Financial, Inc. Overland Park KS

Washington Mutual, Inc. Seattle WA

Wells Fargo & Company San Francisco CA

Whitney Holding Corporation New Orleans LA

Zions Bancorporation Salt Lake City UT

Zurich Financial Services Zurich Switzerland

[Gil @ Dec 2nd 2006 12:32PM]

You should get a prize for writing such a long and detailed comment.

[Michael Andersen @ Apr 25th 2007 11:31PM]

I took the time to read this artical and found it very interesting. Patent laws could and should be used to protect inventors.There can be over protection. to the point that patent laws cross the line into invading the consumers rights. For example. If buy an operating system from Microsoft and your cpu should burn out Microsoft feels that not only should you have to buy a new cpu but you should also have to buy a new operating system as well. One thing has nothing to do with the other as a tech looking at this it is just wrong.It's like an auto maker telling you that if you get a flat on your car you have to buy a new car.