Tuesday, January 11, 2011

Tech Insiders Pessimistic About Comprehensive Patent Reform in 2011

With the new Congress sworn in, reporters are turning to trade group leaders to see what their views are on upcoming legislation.  While certain "tech-related" bills (e.g. updating the Electronic Communications Privacy Act) are expected to move forward this year,  pessimism abounds for more controversial legislation, such as "comprehensive" patent reform:

[I]t may be difficult to pass wide-ranging legislation such as patent reform and some cybersecurity bills introduced over the past two years, with competing interests able to bottle up more controversial pieces of complex bills. [Dean Garfield, president and CEO of ITI] expects that targeted, stripped-down bills will have a better chance of passage.


"I think the chance of having a comprehensive anything in 2011 with this Congress is slim to none," he said.

But if lawmakers want to break off pieces of recent proposals on patent reform or cybersecurity, more limited efforts might have a chance of passing, added Charlie Greenwald, vice president of communications at TechAmerica, a tech trade group. In patent reform, an effort to end the transfer of fees from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to the general fund, or a proposal to revamp the fee structure, might have more traction than comprehensive patent reform, he said.

"The challenge for patent reform has never been amongst political parties but rather amongst large industries central to the U.S. economy, not least of which is technology," said Greenwald, explaining the difficulty of patent reform moving through Congress.

See Computer World, "Congress may be able to tackle tech issues in 2011" (link)

3 Comentários:

patent litigation said...

I would be satisfied at this point if Congress could find the wherewithal to pass even a "stripped-down" patent reform bill whose sole provision was to end fee diversion; the other so-called "reforms" the legislature has presented so far seem like no more than window-dressing in comparison. Merely ending fee diversion in 2011 would be a huge accomplishment; can we make it a New Year's resolution?

Cheryl R. Figlin, Esq. said...

When I was at the Patent Office in 1992 there was talk of stopping the Fee Diversion. In this economy I do not see it happening.

Anonymous said...

Rather than focusing on Fee Diversion, the Office needs better and more, um, creative accounting to set their initial budget higher.

The diversions only happen to those funds in excess of the budget - The Office needs to overbudget and thus keep all the funds with the bonus of appearing to be so well run that they consistently come in under budget.

Basic gorilla management tactics.

DISCLAIMER

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.

TOPO