Hey folks, Parker Higgins and I, both on this list and now at EFF, have been working on this campaign. I think an SFC effort around this campaign would be awesome—we're seeking to get as much feedback and support as possible before taking our findings and stories to DC. (In fact, there's a blog post coming out tomorrow morning about how it really seems like Congress is listening!)
I'm happy to join the discussion, clarify points, provide feedback, and whatever else! Adi On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 11:23 AM, Ernie Zahn <[email protected]>wrote: > This looks really really great. I'll get in touch with some patent law > friends and see if they can weigh in. > > It might be good if we can send this to The Verge. They are doing a lot of > writing on patent law during and in the wake of the Apple Vs Samsung trial. > We can send to [email protected]. Dunno if he'll read it but the > conversation of patent law is on high right now. > > -- > Ernie Zahn > Sent with Sparrow <http://www.sparrowmailapp.com/?sig> > > On Sunday, September 2, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Mr. Caggiano wrote: > > Now that we know we have a pulse, here's a low hanging fruit that should > be of interest to the FC community: > > *Defend Innovation* -- http://defendinnovation.org > > A recently launched EFF campaign to take on some of the more blatant > problems within the patent system. It's a petition covering 7 proposals > > *1)* A patent covering software should be shorter: no more than five > years from the application > date.<https://defendinnovation.org/proposal/shorten-patent-term> > > *2)* If the patent is invalid or there's no infringement, the trolls > should have to pay the legal > fees.<https://defendinnovation.org/proposal/shift-court-fees-away-innocent-parties> > > *3)* Patent applicants should be required to provide an example of > running software code for each claim in the > patent.<https://defendinnovation.org/proposal/open-patent-granting-process> > > *4) *Infringers should avoid liability if they independently arrive at > the patented > invention.<https://defendinnovation.org/proposal/relax-liability-infringers> > > *5)* Patents and licenses should be public right away. Patent owners > should be required to keep their public records > up-to-date.<https://defendinnovation.org/proposal/improve-notice-function> > > *6) *The law should limit damages so that a patent owner can't collect > millions if the patent represented only a tiny fraction of a defendant's > product. <https://defendinnovation.org/proposal/calculating-damages> > > *7) *Congress should commission a study and hold hearings to examine > whether software patents actually benefit our economy at > all.<https://defendinnovation.org/proposal/software-patents-what-are-they-good> > There's some good discussion and attempts at clarification in the comment > threads, you can vote up comments that make the most sense, and the final > distilled material will go to congress in the form of a fancy white paper. > > I say we throw a little clout and muscle into this, also curious to hear > your brilliant minds on some of the more complicated nuances being debated > on the site. > > In the least, perhaps a little slacktivism and retweet :) > > RT @futuresoup: The patent system is broken. Tell congress what's up w/ 7 > obvious proposals on @EFF's defendinnovation.org #patentfail > > > Glad you're all around, > Jacob > _______________________________________________ > Discuss mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.freeculture.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > FAQ: http://wiki.freeculture.org/Fc-discuss > > > > _______________________________________________ > Discuss mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.freeculture.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > FAQ: http://wiki.freeculture.org/Fc-discuss > >
_______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freeculture.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss FAQ: http://wiki.freeculture.org/Fc-discuss
