Wednesday, February 04, 2009

Unlikely Duo Set Out to Set The Record Straight On NPEs and Patent Litigation

"When the cat and mouse agree, the grocer is ruined."

-- Iranian proverb
Today it was announced that Nathan Myhvold is teaming up with Professor Mark Lemley to conduct a two-year study on patent litigation, and further analyze the frequency and effect of non-practicing entity (NPE) litigation on the patent system. No matter what side of the debate your opinion falls, there is little doubt that the findings of the study will be one of the most anticipated events.

From today's press release:
"I tend to be an advocate of patent reform, while Nathan is generally more skeptical," Lemley said. "If we collaborate on a project together it will... be harder for critics to say that it has just one point of view."

Though an effort to pass patent reform legislation that would make it more difficult to file patent lawsuits stalled in Congress last year, the issue may yet be revisited on Capitol Hill.

Lemley said that he's seen estimates on the number of suits filed by non-practicing entities that range wildly, from 2% to 50% of all patent litigation. In addition, many struggle even to define what makes a so-called "patent troll" that acquires patents to use in court, and what makes a legitimate non-practicing entity.

"There is some gray area," Lemley said, "What do you do about an IP-holding subsidiary of a company?"

Intellectual Ventures executive editor Wayt Gibbs said that an impartial study of patent litigation is necessary. "This is very important to innovation policy," Gibbs said. "It shouldn't be subjected to guesses and debates by highly interested parties."

Gibbs said the study is focused on the years 2000 through 2007, and includes "data on every single patent case filed" in that period. The roughly two-year project is being undertaken by a number of different Intellectual Ventures employees alongside Lemley, and is expected to produce several papers.

- See: "Famed patent firm backs study on touchy subject" (link)

For more on recent activities of Intellectual Ventures,

- See "Microsoft's big brains spill into patent firm" (link)

See also "Venture firm picks up Transmeta chip patents" (link)

2 Comentários:

Anonymous said...

Let me guess -- they will state that 75% of all patent litigation is by "trolls" who are litigating "poor quality patents." The solution to fix all this is for the USPTO to further reduce allowance rates and to Bilski every single claim that so much as remotely resembles a software claim.

Does ANYONE take Lemley seriously? This is the same guy who argued FOR the new continuation rules because allowance the applicant an unlimited number of RCE's allows the applicant to 'bully' the examiner into allowing the case. (apparently he couldn't take 10 minutes to learn how the count system works and that examiners LOVE an applicant who keeps burning rce's and won't give up)

David said...

Isn't Lemley a NPE?


This Blog/Web Site ("Blog") is for educational purposes only and is not legal advice. Use of the Blog does not create any attorney-client relationship between you and Peter Zura or his firm. Persons requiring legal advice should contact a licensed attorney in your state. Any comment posted on the Blog can be read by any Blog visitor; do not post confidential or sensitive information. Any links from another site to the Blog are beyond the control of Peter Zura and does not convey his, or his past or present employer(s) approval, support, endorsement or any relationship to any site or organization.

The 271 Patent Blog © 2008. Template by Dicas Blogger.