3 Comments

1. IMO: the “Guru Lair” has become an advertising support site. We all know the power
   controversy can represent when writing which fits, IMO, the general anti “sour puss” non-IP viewpoint of parts of his site. He’s been ranting the same stuck message and copy for years and years.

   While it is true independent inventors should confront the notion of first building a business case to support their seeming inventive matter commercially v. racing off to get/have applications written and filed (by them or whomever), it is also true that if the proposed patent harmonization takes place inventors will have no other choice but to “file first” as is true in virtually the rest of the world (www.piausa.org)

   Wonder what our “friend” is going to do then? He’s probably not even aware of what is going on concerning patent reform since he has what I dub a passive site with the same old/same old copy year after year.

   Comment by PENNY BALLOU — September 19, 2005 #

2. After reading “The case againsts patents” booklet
   I just don’t get it: how can you put something
   into a public domain by openly publishing it and not filing for a patent
   and, at the same time, to expect somebody to pay you royalties ?
   This advice from “guru” is a complete BS - a recipe for
   disaster.
   This guy seems to be totally out of touch with modern reality…
   In the modern days, any good
   idea gets automatically stolen
   by megacorps, patented or unpatented, they just don’t care.

   But, at the end of the day, usually many years later,
   only a strong and valid patent can provide some leverage in claiming at least some of the deserved compensation back from those corporations.

   It all boils down to just a few obscurely worded patent claims discussed in a court room.

   No patent - no fair reward for your creativity ever.
   Period.

   Unless you want to be a slave, a cheap labor for those big guys…
   I would rather be a “patent warrior” and kick some corporate ass…

   Comment by Fiztech — September 20, 2005 #

3. I’m sad to see that Penny believes that “first-inventor-to-file” will mean that independent US inventors will be forced to file patent applications any more quickly than at present.

   There are two reasons why inventors might believe that, but neither stands up to closer scrutiny.

   One is an erroneous belief that anyone to whom you give details of your invention will be able to go off and file their own patent application on it. Of course, if they disregard the law, they could do that today as well. But the law today says that only the true inventor is entitled to the patent.

   And under the proposed reforms, it will still only be possible if they disregard the law. The law will continue to say that only the true inventor is entitled to the patent. And it will continue to provide a procedure to put things right if it does happen. (Only this procedure will hopefully be less stacked against an independent inventor who filed second than the current interference practice is.)

   The second reason inventors might think they would have to file before they are ready is because they can see that inventors in other countries often have to do so. And that is indeed true. But what’s the reason why they have to? It’s *not* because of the first-inventor-to-file rule. For someone to come up with the same invention independently and then file on it is very rare indeed (outside fast-moving, expensive high technologies that are the realm of big businesses rather then independent inventors).

   Rather, the reason inventors in other countries have to file before they are ready is because of the novelty law. In most countries, this says that once the inventor has made details of the invention public, it’s too late to file a patent application. So they have to file before they’ve tested the invention on the market and built the business case that Penny talks about.

   Under current US law, inventors don’t have to file in quite such a rush. They have up to 12 months after they’ve made their invention public. Though they still can’t put off filing beyond that 12 months.

   And that will still be true under the proposed reforms. US inventors will still have a 12 month grace period for testing the market and building the business case, before they have to file their patent application. They won’t have the disadvantage that they see in other countries.

   Comment by Tim Jackson — September 21, 2005 #

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Supporters