backtop


Print 31 comment(s) - last by sgw2n5.. on Feb 24 at 4:29 PM

It's working on more resources for people and companies who are victims of patent trolling

Companies that launch patent lawsuits against others in order to get licensing fees for products or services that aren't even based on the patents -- better known as patent trolls -- are getting out of hand, and the Obama administration is looking to control these trolls with tighter initiatives. 

Whitehouse.gov offered a handy little chart that shows what the government plans to do to prevent patent trolling.

So far, the Obama administration has launched a website to answer questions for people or companies that have received demand letters; issued a draft rule boost competition and make it more difficult to hide "abusive" litigation methods; implemented a training program for patent abuse; launched better exclusion order enforcement, and is working with stakeholders to give input on patent issues and policies. 

Now, the government is taking further action by working on new initiatives, programs and resources that offer up-to-date information on tech fields and how to determine if an invention is "truly novel."

The plan is to also offer legal help to small businesses and inventors, and create a program that strengthens incentives for inventors who are creating technologies that benefit humanity. 


[SOURCE: 42 Floors]

The government announced the original five initiatives back in June 2013, recognizing that the number of patent troll cases tying up courts was getting out of hand. 

A notable example of patent trolling is Apple vs. Samsung. The two have been duking it out since April 2011, when Apple accused Samsung of copying the iPhone and iPad devices. They've launched patent lawsuits back and forth all over the world since then, and have attempted mediation, but can't seem to come to an agreement.

Samsung has been warring with Dyson, as well. In August 2013, Dyson filed a lawsuit against Samsung over a new vacuum that the Galaxy device maker revealed at IFA 2013. Dyson claimed that Samsung's MotionSync steering mechanism copied its own DC37 and DC39 models. However, three months after launching the suit, Dyson dropped the case. Samsung then accused Dyson of using patent litigation as a marketing tool, and said Dyson's previous lawsuits with other companies further prove this. Samsung recently countersued for $9.43 million

Samsung recently had better luck with other companies, though. It managed to settle with Google, Ericsson and Cisco separately in recent weeks to end all litigation related to patents.

Source: Whitehouse.gov



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Huh
By Reclaimer77 on 2/21/2014 12:03:48 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
The plan is to also offer legal help to small businesses and inventors, and create a program that strengthens incentives for inventors who are creating technologies that benefit humanity.


How exactly does this prevent large corporations from trolling each other over patents that should never be granted in the first place?

As usual Obama solutions are for problems that didn't exist, while the elephant in the room gets ignored.

Also as someone who clearly abused the power of his office to eliminate a judgement against Apple, I can see why he's NOT truly looking to stop patent trolls.




RE: Huh
By Hakuryu on 2/21/2014 12:21:24 PM , Rating: 4
Case in point - the company that patented the genes directly related to breast cancer. No college or inventor could even use those genes to test new medicines or procedures without paying the company that owned the rights to them.

So this 'plan' is needed to make sure that 'owner' can't stop people from inventing new ways to combat disease (where before they might simply say you can't use their patented genes, while taking money from drug companies making a living off of treating and not curing).

Funny how things exist that you didn't think of?


RE: Huh
By DaveLessnau on 2/21/2014 12:40:00 PM , Rating: 2
Well, the elephant in the room here is not that "this 'plan' is needed to make sure that 'owner' can't stop people from inventing new ways to combat disease." The big gray thing in the corner is that the Patent and Trademark Office allowed someone to patent those genes.


RE: Huh
By danjw1 on 2/21/2014 12:54:23 PM , Rating: 2
I believe you are referring to BRAC1 gene. The Lower courts ruled that you can actually "invent" a gene that existed before you were born. Which seems to me to be an oxymoron. But, the SCOTUS threw that out, they decided that a naturally occurring gene could not be "invented" by anyone. They did uphold the patent on the particular testing method of the company that had attempted to patent the gene.

A similar case is currently working its way through the Australian court system.


RE: Huh
By lagomorpha on 2/21/2014 1:17:37 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Case in point - the company that patented the genes directly related to breast cancer.


1) Patent genes that lead to cancer
2) Prevent anyone from producing these genes without a license
3) Cancer cured!


RE: Huh
By chµck on 2/21/2014 3:17:23 PM , Rating: 2
RE: Huh
By sgw2n5 on 2/21/2014 1:06:26 PM , Rating: 2
Baby-steps.

Just because the entire problem isn't going to be fixed in one fell swoop, doesn't mean that incremental advancements should not be welcomed.

quote:
As usual Obama solutions are for problems that didn't exist...


Citation needed. More Obama derangement syndrome?


RE: Huh
By Reclaimer77 on 2/21/2014 1:21:10 PM , Rating: 1
Did the stimulus address the actual cause of the downturn? No.

Does Obamacare actually fix the problems of rising healthcare costs and what's wrong with our healthcare system? No.

Did his plan to lower college tuition even do that? Tuition costs actually INCREASED because of his plan!

These are just a few, do you need more?

Now to be fair the problem isn't Obama so much as it is a super-large centralized Government that thinks it can control and "fix" everything. But he's certainly the biggest proponent of central planning we've seen in a long time.


RE: Huh
By room200 on 2/21/14, Rating: -1
RE: Huh
By Reclaimer77 on 2/21/14, Rating: 0
RE: Huh
By BRB29 on 2/21/2014 2:14:59 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Everything you just said is a lie. Stimulus didn't cause job growth, even to this day the job situation in this country sucks balls.


Exaggeration. Job market has been much better and the vast improvement since 2008 is apparent.

quote:
And we still have a net negative of jobs since the stimulus was passed!

I don't know what you mean by this but the number of jobs have increased since the stimulus. Both in nominal number and unemployment rate.

quote:
No now you'll go into bankruptcy FROM insurance premiums alone

You can't unless you're really bad at managing your own money. Statistics showed that healthcare cost did not rise the normal 10% annually it was doing before. Now it's up about 6% a year or less.

quote:
Anyone defending Obamacare is an abject idiot. Here's your sign.

I'm not even defending Obamacare but you just tried to say the economy sucks(in your mind) so therefore, obamacare sucks. That doesn't even make sense as they are not related. Obamacare roll out, execution and plan is not good. No one is denying that. However, the people bashing it cannot come up with a better plan. They're all saying "Healthcare sucks before, Obamacare sucks now, screw obama ".

So until you have something better than a dumb rant, please do share. Otherwise, you are just another whiner.

quote:
it's time to pay attention to the facts.

Yes, take your own advice.


RE: Huh
By Reclaimer77 on 2/21/2014 2:35:20 PM , Rating: 1
The only net increase in jobs under Obama has been from Government jobs. Which frankly, don't count. We STILL have less private sector jobs than when Obama took office. FACT. Your attempt to paint a rosy picture of this economy is lunacy. This is not a healthy economy under any honest evaluation.

quote:
I'm not even defending Obamacare but you just tried to say the economy sucks(in your mind) so therefore, obamacare sucks.


I did not. Where are you even getting that?

quote:
However, the people bashing it cannot come up with a better plan.


I see this said often. The idea that we need an "alternative plan" to do something that shouldn't ever be done, is such a left-wing creation, it makes me sick.

No big-Government solution could improve our health care system. In fact, it was far better than it is today, BECAUSE the Government largely stayed out of it.

Obamacare is flawed at it's core for this simple explanation: Why is health-care in America so expensive? Private insurance. What does Obamacare do? It MANDATES everyone get private insurance. Logic fail to the extreme.

It's entire premise is false. Were there some Americans who couldn't get healthcare coverage? Yes. Was that an epidemic that required an extreme socialist solution that gets forced on everyone? No!

Now because of Obamacare, we have LESS Americans on insurance than before (fact not hyperbole) and health-care is MORE expensive! Brilliant!!

This is what I mean by saying Obama tends to make issues worst by not really fixing the core problem. Obamacare is easy to focus on, because it's obvious his goal is to not improve healthcare at all, but instead to massively redistribute wealth at the point of a gun.


RE: Huh
By sgw2n5 on 2/21/2014 2:43:58 PM , Rating: 2
...this is what republicans actually believe folks...


RE: Huh
By room200 on 2/23/2014 9:53:31 AM , Rating: 2
"The only net increase in jobs under Obama has been from Government jobs. Which frankly, don't count. We STILL have less private sector jobs than when Obama took office. FACT. Your attempt to paint a rosy picture of this economy is lunacy. This is not a healthy economy under any honest evaluation."

Dude, stop pulling these things from your ass. http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/09/09/816761... Government employment has DECREASED under Obama.


RE: Huh
By KCjoker on 2/21/2014 6:26:44 PM , Rating: 2
The labor participation rate is at an all time low. And there are more jobs that are part time instead of full time since Obama took office.


RE: Huh
By Keeir on 2/23/2014 3:47:19 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Exaggeration. Job market has been much better and the vast improvement since 2008 is apparent.


True, things are significantly better than the worst segment of the recent "recession".

But even today, there are less jobs than in Jan. 1, 2008.

http://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet?reques...

It gets worse when you consider that the US population is -growing-. If you take the population growth rate into account, in Jan 1, 2014, there were around 87% of the jobs available in Jan 1, 2008.

The job market has gotten somewhat better in part because companies are hiring again at a normal pace (not an accelerate pace to replace workers lost 2008-2010) AND people have permanently dropped out of the market or settled for part time work/etc.

quote:
I don't know what you mean by this but the number of jobs have increased since the stimulus. Both in nominal number and unemployment rate.


This is tricky. If what is ment is the first stimulus act of Bush in 2008, then the statement is true.

If its the ARA act of the Obama adminstration, job losses continued for more than 12 months after the passing of the bill. Its true that ~16-18 months after the passage of the bill, job growth kicked back up again and has held steady at 1%-1.5% a year. But its yet to catch up to the new entrants to the job market age. (Keep in mind, the most relavent time period is 1985-1995 as people born in this time would be entering the job market in 2008-2018. The US had population growths of 1-1.5% in this time frame).

Its entirely possible that Obama's ARA halted the loss of jobs... however it would not be wrong to state that the ratio of jobs/possible workers has not improved, even after an estimated 500 billion and 5 years of the ACA.

quote:
I'm not even defending Obamacare but you just tried to say the economy sucks(in your mind) so therefore, obamacare sucks. That doesn't even make sense as they are not related. Obamacare roll out, execution and plan is not good. No one is denying that. However, the people bashing it cannot come up with a better plan. They're all saying "Healthcare sucks before, Obamacare sucks now, screw obama ".


Sadly, you are one of those people who seem to equate Healthcare Insurance with Healthcare. Obama's ACA focuses primarly on Healthcare Insurance and does very little to address rising healthcare costs. It does seem to have slightly softened the rise of Insurance premiums. It will be interesting to see the effect 2-4 years down the road. Healthcare Insurnace is a business. It will have to ensure the cost of premiums exceed by 10-20% of the cost all all actual healthcare and overhead. As long as the "new" people being insured tend to consume less healthcare than the new premiums, overall premium growth will be blunted in the short term. If the "new" patients consume more healthcare than premiums, then expect premium growth to continue similiar to pre-ACA levels if not worse. The funniest part of the ACA is that it is counting on a reduction of payments in the Medicare/Medicaid system. While Medicare/Medicaid don't always have the lowest price per procedure, on average already pay significantly less per healthcare unit than almost all major insurance carriers. I sincerely doubt this reduction will ever go into effect with the current system the way it is...

Healthcare itself needs to be tackled. A few relatively easy steps would have helped reduce the cost of actual healthcare more than the an Insurance reform.

1.) Single Price Law. Make it illegal for medical service providers to charge different prices to different purchasors. An absolustely ridicolous amount of healthcare costs have to do with fighting over the price of healthcare. A single payer system saves these costs, but forces a central planning choice on the prices. A single price law would save the systems and preseve the ability for individual providers to set thier own prices (as long as its the same for everyone)

2.) Open Government run medical schools and churn out Doctors/Nurses. The US medical school system produces fewer doctors/population every year it seems. Meanwhile, people want to consume more medical resources. The predictable outcome is wage inflation of Doctors.... which is justified by the unreasonablly high tutition and fees charged by the schools. The schools put up barriers to new entrants...


RE: Huh
By sgw2n5 on 2/21/2014 2:19:08 PM , Rating: 2
My sister (diabetic) can actually afford coverage for herself and her family now.
People whose rates have gone up were in really bad plans to begin with... true, they were only paying ~$100 per month, but they had a $10k deductible and limited liability of usually around $60k total; completely worthless. If a plan doesn't meet the minimum standards of not completely ripping off the customer, it's gone. I see that as a good thing.


RE: Huh
By Reclaimer77 on 2/21/14, Rating: 0
RE: Huh
By bankerdude on 2/21/14, Rating: 0
RE: Huh
By StormyKnight on 2/22/2014 1:25:05 AM , Rating: 1
Reclaimer, do you in fact know what type of diabetes his sister has? How do you so casually and callously describe her as having onset or type II diabetes? You sir, are a fucking idiot.

I have had great insurance for the preponderance of the 14 years I've been at my job. But thanks to cost cutting and Obamacare rearing it's ugly head, my monthly premium has gone up 300% and my deductible is going from $1200 to $5000. I blame Obamacare mostly for this. Not somebody that actually gets something out of it. Do I believe Obamacare will do more harm than good. You betcha. But you go and attack somebody like this because you got the shit-end of the stick and actually BLAME her for it? Classy. Real classy.

You need to shut your cock-holster and back away from the keyboard.


RE: Huh
By Reclaimer77 on 2/22/2014 2:01:47 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
I have had great insurance for the preponderance of the 14 years I've been at my job. But thanks to cost cutting and Obamacare rearing it's ugly head, my monthly premium has gone up 300% and my deductible is going from $1200 to $5000. I blame Obamacare mostly for this. Not somebody that actually gets something out of it.


And you don't understand my anger??

The idea that's it's societies problem, and everyone needs to bend over and take it because his sister has diabetes...just sent me over the edge. That line of thinking, this forced Collectivism, is ruining us!

And please, we all know the vast majority of diabetes cases are caused from poor diet and lack of exercise. No, I don't know for a fact this isn't the case for his sister, but it's a pretty safe bet!

Your logic is like attacking me if I blame someone for contracting HIV. Sure, there's technically a chance a blood transfusion is to blame. Is that likely? No.

And I can't believe you're talking about my lack of "class" when you've spoken to me in such a manner. Cock-holster...lol, just wow. F'ing idiot? What have I ever done to you!?


RE: Huh
By sgw2n5 on 2/24/2014 4:29:22 PM , Rating: 2
She has (and always has had) type 1 diabetes...

You really are a classy guy.


RE: Huh
By rsmech on 2/21/2014 2:16:51 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Now if you're a regular middle class family who did not have insurance, you can get it.


The last part of your statement is not true. It's not you can get it. It's you MUST get it.

I agree reform was needed, this is beyond reform. It's socialism.


RE: Huh
By sgw2n5 on 2/21/2014 2:23:50 PM , Rating: 1
No, HCR is not socialism. Very far from it in fact. What makes you think the HCRA is socialism?


RE: Huh
By sgw2n5 on 2/21/2014 2:13:39 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Did the stimulus address the actual cause of the downturn? No.

I don't think the stimulus was originally designed to fix the cause of the economic downturn... it was more of a band-aid to help the economy recover. Legislation (Dodd-Frank) was introduced to fix the actual cause (sub-prime mortgage meltdown and predatory lending practices).

quote:
Does Obamacare actually fix the problems of rising healthcare costs and what's wrong with our healthcare system? No.

The HCR does allow millions of people who were previously uninsured (pre-existing conditions) or who simply couldn't afford insurance to be covered. I agree that our healthcare system is fundamentally flawed... how can healthcare costs be kept in check? Single-payer system?

quote:
Did his plan to lower college tuition even do that? Tuition costs actually INCREASED because of his plan!

I don't know enough about it to comment either way, but there is evidence that his plan IS THE DIRECT CAUSE of tuition costs rising?

Government (and central planning) certainly can be a problem if there is poorly designed legislation. The whole point of the current system, however, is that things can be constitutively re-worked, amended, and fixed. When inefficiencies are identified, they can and should be fixed. Government and good organization is absolutely critical at this point... there are around 7 billion of us on the planet now after all.



RE: Huh
By Reclaimer77 on 2/21/14, Rating: 0
RE: Huh
By sgw2n5 on 2/21/2014 3:13:25 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
So let's make 7 billion people slaves. Great.

Hyperbole much?

quote:
As more time passes it becomes painfully obvious to me that there can be no moral justification for Government.


Ya, I just hate driving around on paved roads, especially over bridges that are inspected/maintained regularly and are not likely to collapse. I also hate it how all of the food and medicine I buy are safe and not likely to make me or my family ill.


RE: Huh
By Reclaimer77 on 2/21/2014 5:11:09 PM , Rating: 1
Yes of course, without totalitarianism we would all just shrivel up and die.


RE: Huh
By Reclaimer77 on 2/21/2014 7:23:12 PM , Rating: 2
Hyperbole?

Over one seventh of the entire human race lives in China.

Think about it...


RE: Huh
By room200 on 2/23/2014 9:56:29 AM , Rating: 2
That doesn it; Reclaimer77 is nothing but a troll who doesn't even have a job in the first place. Listen, Patrick, go play your video games and let the adults continue to talk here.


By drycrust3 on 2/21/2014 3:11:44 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Companies that launch patent lawsuits against others in order to get licensing fees for products or services that aren't even based on the patents -- better known as patent trolls -- are getting out of hand, and the Obama administration is looking to control these trolls with tighter initiatives.

I get nervous when I see a government decide that "that person there" is "a patent troll" and that "no one has to pay them their licence fees". That sort of thing is what happened in Nazi Germany and countless other tyrannical governments, all with the aim of keeping "enemies" in line. If you go even a little bit down this path you will end up with people being paid or not paid depending on where their loyalties lie, and that is very dangerous ground to be stepping on. If the law says everyone has to pay someone a licencing fee, then that someone should be paid regardless of where their political loyalties lie.
This isn't to say there isn't a problem with patent licencing fees, it may well be there is a problem, but having a political leader pointing the finger at "that person there" or "them there" and saying "don't pay them what they are entitled too" isn't they way a democracy should use to fix the problem, the way to fix it is to fix the patenting standards so the problem of abuse is fixed.




"There's no chance that the iPhone is going to get any significant market share. No chance." -- Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki