Apple behind new patent reform bill

Apple behind new patent reform bill

Summary: Apple is one of several companies adding their support to the Patent Reform Act of 2007 which Macworld describes as "A bipartisan bill currently under consideration in the U.S.

SHARE:
TOPICS: Patents
4

Apple is one of several companies adding their support to the Patent Reform Act of 2007 which Macworld describes as "A bipartisan bill currently under consideration in the U.S. Congress, the proposed legislation calls for some fundamental changes to the way that patents are granted and the way they’re litigated in U.S. courts."

Apple joins a blue chip list of technology companies including Amazon.com, Autodesk, Cisco Systems, Dell, Hewlett-Packard, Microsoft, Palm and Visa in the Coalition for Patent Fairness. Sponsors include Senators Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and Orrin Hatch (R-UT), and Representatives Howard Berman (D-CA) and Lamar Smith (R-TX).

Topic: Patents

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

4 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • Apples cares about you, MS hates you

    I knew Apple was wonderful and good and kind and caring, otherwise why would they support something that was so wonderful? Apple's support of this will absolutely [b]kill[/b] MS!! HAHAHAHA!!!! m1cR0$$$lop must be so made about this bill and it fills my heart with joy that Apple is going to cause mICR0$$$ux a lot of grief with this!!!

    [i]Apple joins a blue chip list of technology companies including Amazon.com, Autodesk, Cisco Systems, Dell, Hewlett-Packard, [b]Microsoft[/b][/i]...

    Oh... um... well... I'm sure that Apple is [b]truly[/b] supporting it while MS is only supporting it to illegally maintain their monopoly. Ooooooo, I hate M$$$$$ so much that the veins in my forehead are throbbing right now!! Praise be to Jobs.
    NonZealot
    • I'm curious..

      What is your hatred against Apple (I've always wondered this and I'm sure you've stated why on more than one occasion)?

      All the companies involved are just tired of getting sued, which is why they are screaming for it. If it was happening the opposite way we'd see all those companies saying patent reform is a stupid idea.

      But since patent "trolls" own some of the very patents they would love to get their hands on.. Guess what.. Waaaahhhhh Waahhhhh....

      Do I believe in patent reform.. Hell yes, but the patents under those companies should ALSO be checked as well. They all have meaningless patents that shouldn't be allowed.

      I own your mouse click. :P
      ju1ce
      • It's obvious isn't it?

        He has serious mental issues.
        JohnM865
  • Provisions.

    ?If we are to maintain our position at the forefront of the world?s economy and continue to lead the globe in innovation and production, then we must have an efficient and streamlined patent system to allow for high quality patents that limits counterproductive litigation,? said Leahy.

    First, the Patent Reform Act of 2007 now includes a pure ?first-to-file? system, which will inject needed clarity and certainty into the system. The United States stands alone among nations that grant patents in giving priority for a patent to the first inventor, as opposed to the first to file a patent application for a claimed invention.

    [Prior art does add complications.]

    Second, poor patent quality has been identified as a key element of the law that needs attention. After a patent is issued, a party seeking to challenge the validity and enforceability of the patent has two avenues under current law: by reexamination proceeding at the USPTO or by litigation in federal district court.
    ...
    The Director is instructed to prescribe rules to prevent harassment or abuse, successive petitions are prohibited, and petitioners are stopped from raising the same arguments in court.

    [That should put some limits on Courts and juries.]

    Third, we are keenly aware that a sound patent system needs fair and equitable remedies. As products have become more complex, often involving hundreds or even thousands of patented aspects, litigation has not reliably produced damages awards in infringement cases that correspond to the value of the infringed patent.

    [Now patent holders and juries will have guidelines.]


    The legislation is intended, as stated at the top, to assure that IP generate income with as few uncertainties as possible.
    Anton Philidor