Obama and his traitor cronies will do anything they can to destroy this country economically.
On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 9:17 AM, Bruce Majors <[email protected]> wrote: > Thursday, June 9, 2011 > Obama regime rips off independent inventors with new patent bill that > aids multinational corporate > cronies<http://www.beckersasc.com/asc-supply-chain-materials-management/patent-bill-would-hamper-physician-inventors-expert-says.html#.TfCETt17JQs;blogger> > Patent Bill Would Hamper Physician-Inventors, Expert > Says<http://www.beckersasc.com/asc-supply-chain-materials-management/patent-bill-would-hamper-physician-inventors-expert-says.html#.TfCETt17JQs;blogger> > > Alert: While no one was watching, crony capitalists and multinational > corporations and the Obama regime have slipped a patent law change in on you > that may pass Congress. It will allow whoever files first for a patent to > get it, as opposed to whomever can show they invented something first. As a > result, independent inventors who have to figure out how to apply for a > patent will be shut out by corporations with legal departments. Everyone > from the unemployed, to small start up businesses that create jobs, to angel > investors who profit from finding new opportunities, will be hurt. > > > A bill that passed the Senate and is now being debated in the House would > hamper the ability of physicians and other small operations in obtaining > patents for medical devices, according to Paul Ryan, CEO of Acacia Research, > a Newport Beach, Calif., company that partners with inventors in the > patenting process. > > Mr. Ryan says the bill would fundamentally change the patent process for > all inventions in favor of large companies that have the resources to get > through a more complicated patent process. "The current system protects the > little guy," he says. "It has favored the individual inventor. The proposed > changes favor the big med tech and pharma companies." > > *Situation in Congress. *The Senate overwhelmingly passed the America > Invents Act in March by a vote of 95-5. "There was limited testimony and > very little debate in the Senate," Mr. Ryan says. The Senate was looking to > the House to examine the bill more closely. "The battle was always going to > be in the House," Mr. Ryan says. The bill may fail, which was the fate of a > similar patent bill last year, but he thinks the new version has a 50-50 > chance of passage. But even though the bill represents a complete change the > patent process, it has received very little media coverage. "Not may people > are paying attention to it and this is very nuanced stuff," he says. > > *Some good news in the bill. *The bill would alleviate the current > 3.5-year backlog of patent applications by stopping Congress from diverting > income from patent fees to other. Lack of funds means the Patent Office does > not have the manpower to handle backlogged applications, now at 700,000. > However, House Republican leaders recently called for changes in the new > bill that would allow some of fee income to be diverted away from the Patent > Office, according to the *Wall Street Journal*. Mr. Ryan opposes any > diversion of funds. "The intelligent solution would be for Congress to agree > to stop diverting the funds and leave the world’s greatest patent system > alone," he says. > > *Elimination of grace period for applicants. *Meanwhile, the new bill > would scrap the one-year grace period for an inventor to file an > application. Currently, an inventor has one year from the day of conception > to file. Without a grace period, Mr. Ryan says anyone who knows an > inventor's plans could file ahead of him and get full rights. "Inventors > would have no protection if they did not file and someone else filed ahead > of them," he says. He adds that this open-ended approach, similar to > Europe's current system, could double the number of patent applications and > cause an even greater backlog. > > ** > > * > * > > *Imposition of post-grant review. *Under the bill, anyone who wanted to > challenge a patent could file for post-grant review, which is not currently > allowed. Mr. Ryan says a big company could tie up a patent in post-grant > review for years and even bankrupt the small company with legal bills. "The > post-grant review process would also create a huge diversion of > patent-examiner time," he says. This would cause more delays in getting new > inventions onto the market, he says. In Europe, which already has post-grant > review, a San Francisco company's European patent was held up for more than > 10 years, he says. > > ** > > *Specific impact on physician-inventors. *Without a grace period, > physician-inventors would be forced to file "a half-baked application" > before they even had a clear idea of what it ought to be, Mr. Ryan says. If > inventors choose not to file right away, they would have to be careful about > what they said publicly about the invention, because anyone could file the > application and gain control of the invention. > > "This is a problem for the whole scientific inquiry process, where you > share your idea in journals and forums and welcome others to criticize it," > Mr. Ryan says. For this reason, "universities are going to have a very tough > time." Lack of a grace period would also make financing more difficult. > "With no grace period, the inventor-surgeon also couldn't go to venture > capitalists for money," he says. > > -- > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. > For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum > > * Visit our other community at > http://www.PoliticalForum.com/<http://www.politicalforum.com/> > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. > * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
