Comment Re:Frankly, this worries me (Score 1) 336
There is a (legal) problem with your current premise of being able to protect your IP. The problem is that if someone tried to patent your invention, and you show up at the PTO with documents showing that you indeed invented first, you will still lose. The patent system exists in order to foster innovation by granting a monopoly to an inventor, IN EXCHANGE for full disclosure of the invention to the public. Thus, since you did not make an effort to patent your invention (legally, you 'abandoned' it by not being 'diligent' in patenting it), you will lose out to the patent squatters (provided your software wasn't published earlier than their filing date, i.e., the public could see your software. In which case they can't get a patent, but neither can you since you published before filing. Unless it published within the last year).
The new legislation will bring us closer to the ideal of the patent system: full disclosure to the public of inventions. If the law shifts to granting patents to the first to file, inventors will be motivated to file an application for a Patent ASAP, and if not, to PUBLISH (which only needs to be a website showing your invention... no need for journals, etc.) their inventions so that others will not be able to patent their invention.
The bad thing is that if you're an inventor who truly invents something novel before someone else, but they file before you, you get screwed. So long as they didn't steal the idea from you, that is.
Overall, though, I think it will result in a more streamlined system that cuts down on patent squatters. Not perfect, but a step in the right direction.
The new legislation will bring us closer to the ideal of the patent system: full disclosure to the public of inventions. If the law shifts to granting patents to the first to file, inventors will be motivated to file an application for a Patent ASAP, and if not, to PUBLISH (which only needs to be a website showing your invention... no need for journals, etc.) their inventions so that others will not be able to patent their invention.
It almost seems like it could foster a new age of "patent squatters" similar to URL squatters. Opportunists took advantage of the fact that many companies didn't acquire their trademark URLs in the web's infancy. I could easily see a similar technique arising with patents. All you would have to do is:
pick some successful web sites
check to see if they're doing anything remotely worth patenting
see if there's a patent yet for that - file the patent if there's not
blackmail the web site, threatening to shut them down if they don't pay you a royalty/settlement for the use of "their" technique.
The problem with this supposition is that for them to 'squat' on an idea, they would have to find the idea first, which, if I understand your logic, is on a website that is 'public.' If that's true, then they lose all patent rights because it's already published. Of course, this won't keep squatters from doing it, but it is much much easier for the original inventor to just say: "Look at the way-back machine dated prior to the patent application filing date" and it wouldn't even make it out of the patent office's interference proceedings. Whereas, if we keep the 'first to invent' system, it begins to get harder because the squatters can start to dig up memos, emails, flow charts, etc. which could even remotely read on the patent. In response to which, the inventor will have to spend loads of money on lawyers and investigators to find properly documented memos, emails, flow charts, etc. in order to antedate the squatters.
pick some successful web sites
check to see if they're doing anything remotely worth patenting
see if there's a patent yet for that - file the patent if there's not
blackmail the web site, threatening to shut them down if they don't pay you a royalty/settlement for the use of "their" technique.
The bad thing is that if you're an inventor who truly invents something novel before someone else, but they file before you, you get screwed. So long as they didn't steal the idea from you, that is.
Overall, though, I think it will result in a more streamlined system that cuts down on patent squatters. Not perfect, but a step in the right direction.
