This week, together with Public Knowledge and Engine, EFF submitted written comments to the Patent Office regarding its Patent Quality Initiative. We urge the Patent Office to ensure that this program actually reduces the number of invalid patents being issued. Its quality efforts should serve the public interest, not the special interests of patent applicants.
[EFF has] written before about the Patent Office’s problem with software patents. The Patent Office does a very poor job searching for prior art and protecting the public from vague and overbroad claims. There are good reasons to think that software patents are a bad idea even if applications are reviewed carefully. But they cause even more harm when the Patent Office does a bad job. Once issued, invalid patents are very expensive to formally invalidate. Patent litigation can cost millions of dollars—an unreachable sum for members of the public wishing to reclaim property that ought to have been the public’s from the start.
Showing posts with label EFF. Show all posts
Showing posts with label EFF. Show all posts
Saturday, May 09, 2015
Wednesday, May 06, 2015
The PATENT Act: US Senate’s Solid Start to Reforming their Patent System
Will this be the year the US passes patent reform? With both houses of the US Congress finally introducing strong bills to target patent trolls, the EFF sure hopes so.
EFF supported the House’s Innovation Act through its passage in 2013. Unfortunately, the Senate did not respond with a bill worth fighting for. This year, though, not only is the Innovation Act (H.R. 9) back, but the Senate has responded with its own comprehensive legislation—the PATENT Act (S. 1137).
The "Protecting American Talent and Entrepreneurship Act of 2015" includes some much-needed reforms, and EFF supports its passage.
Here’s what we like about the PATENT Act—and what we think could be improved.
EFF supported the House’s Innovation Act through its passage in 2013. Unfortunately, the Senate did not respond with a bill worth fighting for. This year, though, not only is the Innovation Act (H.R. 9) back, but the Senate has responded with its own comprehensive legislation—the PATENT Act (S. 1137).
The "Protecting American Talent and Entrepreneurship Act of 2015" includes some much-needed reforms, and EFF supports its passage.
Here’s what we like about the PATENT Act—and what we think could be improved.
Friday, May 01, 2015
Patent on sending text messages is EFF's stupid patent of the month
Imagine you’re on your way to deliver a case of beer to a party. Before you get there, your boss sends you a text: They want 2 cases now.
You read the text while driving (don’t do that), so you deliver an
extra case when you arrive. Having successfully completed that task, you
leave for your next delivery.
Congratulations! You might get sued by the owner of April’s stupid patent of the month.
Eclipse owns a patent family of more than 20 patents, all of which claim priority back to a single 2003 provisional application. These patents claim various closely related “notification systems.” Eclipse interprets its patents very broadly and has asserted them against a wide range of mundane business practices. For example, in January it sent a letter claiming that Tiger Fitness infringes one of these patents by sending emails to customers updating them about the status of orders. This letter explains that “Eclipse IP aggressively litigates patent infringement lawsuits” and that “litigation is expensive and time consuming.” The letter demands a $45,000 payment.
We think that all of Eclipse’s patents deserve a stupid patent of the month award. But the ’334 patent is especially deserving. This is because the Patent Office issued this patent after a federal court invalidated similar claims from other patents in the same family. On September 4, 2014, Judge Wu of the Central District of California issued an order invalidating claims from three of Eclipse’s patents. The court explained that these patents claim abstract ideas like checking to see if a task has been completed. Judge Wu applied the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Alice v CLS Bank and held the claims invalid under Section 101 of the Patent Act.
Creative Comons By Electronic Frontier Foundation
Congratulations! You might get sued by the owner of April’s stupid patent of the month.
Eclipse owns a patent family of more than 20 patents, all of which claim priority back to a single 2003 provisional application. These patents claim various closely related “notification systems.” Eclipse interprets its patents very broadly and has asserted them against a wide range of mundane business practices. For example, in January it sent a letter claiming that Tiger Fitness infringes one of these patents by sending emails to customers updating them about the status of orders. This letter explains that “Eclipse IP aggressively litigates patent infringement lawsuits” and that “litigation is expensive and time consuming.” The letter demands a $45,000 payment.
We think that all of Eclipse’s patents deserve a stupid patent of the month award. But the ’334 patent is especially deserving. This is because the Patent Office issued this patent after a federal court invalidated similar claims from other patents in the same family. On September 4, 2014, Judge Wu of the Central District of California issued an order invalidating claims from three of Eclipse’s patents. The court explained that these patents claim abstract ideas like checking to see if a task has been completed. Judge Wu applied the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Alice v CLS Bank and held the claims invalid under Section 101 of the Patent Act.
Creative Comons By Electronic Frontier Foundation
Friday, April 17, 2015
Fighting for Patent Reform in Washington, D.C.
The main focus: Defend Innovation, Electronic Freedom Foundation's newest report on the broken US patent system.
This report is more than just EFF’s ideas for patent reform. It’s the result of more than two years of research, interviews, and data collection. They surveyed the concerns of software developers, entrepreneurs, legal professionals, students, and everyday technology users affected by the current patent system. They held town halls at major tech companies in Silicon Valley and interviewed individual programmers, and we launched a petition where users could submit comments and share their feedback on proposals to address these issues. Over 16,500 people spoke up.
All of this research culminated in over thirty pages that highlight just how broken the current patent system is: not only does it create a chilling effect on innovation and new technologies—exactly opposite of its claimed goal—but it is readily abused by bad actors and patent trolls.
This report is more than just EFF’s ideas for patent reform. It’s the result of more than two years of research, interviews, and data collection. They surveyed the concerns of software developers, entrepreneurs, legal professionals, students, and everyday technology users affected by the current patent system. They held town halls at major tech companies in Silicon Valley and interviewed individual programmers, and we launched a petition where users could submit comments and share their feedback on proposals to address these issues. Over 16,500 people spoke up.
All of this research culminated in over thirty pages that highlight just how broken the current patent system is: not only does it create a chilling effect on innovation and new technologies—exactly opposite of its claimed goal—but it is readily abused by bad actors and patent trolls.
Saturday, April 11, 2015
EFF Busts Podcasting Patent, Invalidating Key Claims at US Patent Office
The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) invalidated key claims in the so-called “podcasting patent” today after a petition for review from the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF)—a decision that significantly curtails the ability of a patent troll to threaten podcasters big and small.
“We have a lot to celebrate here,” said EFF Staff Attorney Vera Ranieri. “But unfortunately, our work to protect podcasting is not done. Personal Audio continues to seek patents related to podcasting. We will continue to fight for podcasters, and we hope the Patent Office does not give them any more weapons to shake down small podcasters.”
EFF partnered with attorneys working pro bono and the Cyberlaw Clinic at Harvard's Berkman Center for Internet and Society to craft the petition for review with the USPTO.
“We have a lot to celebrate here,” said EFF Staff Attorney Vera Ranieri. “But unfortunately, our work to protect podcasting is not done. Personal Audio continues to seek patents related to podcasting. We will continue to fight for podcasters, and we hope the Patent Office does not give them any more weapons to shake down small podcasters.”
EFF partnered with attorneys working pro bono and the Cyberlaw Clinic at Harvard's Berkman Center for Internet and Society to craft the petition for review with the USPTO.
Thursday, August 28, 2014
Magical Drug Wins EFF’s Stupid Patent of the Month
"Good news everyone! The US Patent Office has granted a patent on a cure for cancer. Last December, the Patent Office issued Patent No. 8,609,158 on a “potent drug” that “rebukes cancer, cancer cells, and kills cancer.”
"According to the patent, this drug cures a litany of other maladies. What is this wonderful invention, you ask? It is a combination of “evening primrose oil, rice, sesame seeds, green beans, coffee, meat, cheese, milk, green tea extract, evening primrose seeds, and wine.”
"The patent examiner could and should have rejected it on any number of grounds, including enablement, indefiniteness, and utility."
Simon Phipps Electronic Frontier Foundation
(EFF uses CC by 3.0 us for its blogs)
"According to the patent, this drug cures a litany of other maladies. What is this wonderful invention, you ask? It is a combination of “evening primrose oil, rice, sesame seeds, green beans, coffee, meat, cheese, milk, green tea extract, evening primrose seeds, and wine.”
"The patent examiner could and should have rejected it on any number of grounds, including enablement, indefiniteness, and utility."
Simon Phipps Electronic Frontier Foundation
(EFF uses CC by 3.0 us for its blogs)
Thursday, April 10, 2008
Software patents could be killed off for good
Software patents could be killed off for good
Inquirer - Harrow,England,UK In an ironic twist, it's even reported that the Federal Circuit's own web site could be produced on software patent infringing software. ...
Closely-watched case may spell trouble for software patents
Ars Technica - Boston,MA,USA Ars covered the launch of the End Software Patents Project back in February. Like the EFF brief, the ESP brief argues that the key Supreme Court precedents ...
Chance to kill software patents opens
Chance to kill software patents opens
By Cory Doctorow End Software Patents (ESP) and the Free Software Foundation have filed an amicus curiae brief in the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's (CAFC) rehearing of the In re Bilski case set for May 8, 2008. The rehearing could lead to ...
An opportunity to End Software Patents: ESP briefs Court in its ...
By jake End Software Patents (ESP) has sent out a press release about their amicus curiae (friend of the court) brief filed in a patent case which they believe could effectively stop software patents in the US. "ESP executive director Ben ...
Closely-watched case may spell trouble for software patents
The ACLU, EFF, and the End Software Patents Project have all filed amicus briefs in the In Re Bilksi patent case, urging a federal court to rein in the patenting of abstract ideas. The case, which will be argued next month, ...
News: An opportunity to End Software Patents
Up until recent there's been a lot of talk about various efforts to reduce or limit software patents for the betterment of everyone. Now it seems that another group has got a step further and created a legal situation that might once ...
Tuesday, April 08, 2008
ACLU enters the software patent debate
ACLU enters the software patent debate
LinuxWorld.com - Montvale,NJ,USA EFF is looking to pick off specific patents, End Software Patents wants to fix the software patent problem for economic reasons, and now ACLU is bringing up ...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)