A pioneering project aimed at improving the quality of patents in the US must be made compulsory if it is to work, according to the project's manager. Currently the pilot project is only voluntary. The Peer to Patent project allows people to alert the US Patents and Trademarks Office (USPTO) when they have found material …
A prio-art office
UPSTO nor EPO and else shouldn't handle prior-arts, these ones should be handle by a separated entity. Hence, when the litigations come one can compare. The fact that a prior-arts compulsory exist for itself would cool any attempt to benefit unlegitimately from some patents.
The patent practice has failed, so its counter-part is needed.
Well that just about sums up the problem ...
"... defended by the patent applicants who say that if third party prior art was admitted they would harass our applications and they would never get issued."
So let be get this clear, applicants don't want third parties to be able to point out prior art because it would stop their patents being awarded ? Isn't that an admission that they are applying for, and getting approved, patents for things that are plainly not patentable ?
So there we have it, admission that US patents are worthless because the system is fundamentally broken - and people wonder why it gets criticised !
Great idea -- why the fatal flaw?
I just don't get it. No-one thinks the current system works. Big companies, little companies, especially the free software community all hate it. It must be costing the economy billions. Why are they being so ineffectual? The rule is less than useless unless it's compulsory.
Current system works perfectly...
...if you're a huge company paying off the government.
- Comment Renewable energy 'simply WON'T WORK': Top Google engineers
- Useless 'computer engineer' Barbie FIRED in three-way fsck row
- Game Theory Dragon Age Inquisition: Our chief weapons are...
- 'How a censorious and moralistic blogger ruined my evening'
- Amazon warming up 'cheapo web video' cannon to SINK Netflix