House passes patent overhaul bill
122313
The U.S. House of Representatives hasÂ passed a bill to overhaul the nation's patent system, overcoming objections by many Republicans, small inventors and some labor unions.
557983
The US House of Representatives on Thursday passed a bill designed to boost federal funding for embryonic stem-cell research, defying a veto threat by President George W. Bush.
709519
By Arshad Mohammed, Washington Post Staff Writer  The House of Representatives yesterday passed a bill making it easier for phone companies to offer video programming, bringing consumers a step closer to having more choices for their cable TV service.
242954
The Rules Committee of the US House of Representatives is scheduled to meet on Thursday to discuss how the latest sweeping patent reform legislation, H.R. 1908, is to be introduced to the floor of Congress. Pending the registration of proposed amendments, it could be introduced as soon as Friday.
325151
The U.S. House of Representatives voted on Wednesday to give the Food and Drug Administration more power over drugmakers as part of an effort to better protect the public from dangerous medicines.
365227
(InfoWorld) - Patent overhaul legislation thatÂ passed the U.S. House of Representatives FridayÂ still faces significant opposition as it heads to the Senate, opponents said. The House bill, supported by several large tech vendors, would tighten the way courts assess patent infringement damages and add a new way to challenge patents after they've been granted. Currently, courts generally consider the value of the entire product when a small piece of the product infringes a patent; the bill would allow courts to base damages only on the value of the infringing piece. DespiteÂ support from such tech vendors as Microsoft, IBM, and Symantec, the bill faces significant opposition from small inventors, many pharmaceutical companies, several small tech vendors, and labor unions. The tech supporters of patent reform have called for the changes for five years. "I would not throw a party just yet," said Bobbie Wilson, director in the litigation department at the Howard Rice Nemerovski Canady Falk & Rabkin PC law firm, based in San Francisco. "Congress has tried to address patent reform before, starting off with a bang and ending with a whimper." Wilson, who supports parts of the bill and questions other parts, said she's a "bit pessimistic" that patent reform legislation will pass before the November 2008 elections. "Remember that there is a whole cottage industry, from the so-called trolls to the patent litigators, who are heavily invested in the status quo," she added. "They will be lobbying hard and spending substantial sums of money to water down or dilute any reform." Opponents will focus hard on the debate in the Senate, added Ronald Riley, president of the Professional Inventors Alliance, a trade group that opposes the House bill. The 45-vote margin in the House is not enough for the Senate "to see it as a mandate," Riley said. Riley's group was among those recruiting labor unions to oppose the bill. In July and August, three labor unions, including the giant AFL-CIO, came out against the House bill. Groups opposed to the bill are going to target lawmakers who support the legislation during the 2008 elections, "regardless of what might happen in the end," Riley said. "We don't care if they get mad," he said. "They can't do anything worse to us than they're doing now. There has to be a price for being bought." Riley and other opponents of the bill argue that it would allow large companies to steal patented inventions from small companies without fear of repercussions. When large tech vendors steal intellectual property and "ship it off to India, everybody loses," Riley said. "This is about jobs." Supporters of the bill argue it's needed because the number of patent infringement lawsuits and size of awards have exploded in recent years. It's too easy for patent holders to sue and collect huge damage awards when a small piece of a tech product is found to infringe, supporters argue. The House passage of the bill was "a major victory for U.S. innovation and competitiveness," John W. Thompson, chairman and CEO of Symantec, said in a statement. "This landmark legislation is the first comprehensive modernization and revision of the patent law in 55 years." But Wilson said the House bill largely ignores the biggest problem with the U.S. patent system -- that an underfunded Patent and Trademark Office lacks examiners and often loses experienced employees due to poor salaries. While the bill would make "sweeping changes" in the way patents are prosecuted and whether they are litigated, the bill's post-grant review provision targets the wrong point of the patent-issuing process, she said. "That's kind of like closing the barn after the horse is gone," she said. "Most of the problem is with bad patents." Representative Howard Berman, a California Democrat and main sponsor of the Patent Reform Act, has also introduced a bill to increase funding at the Patent and Trademark Office. He said Friday he will continue to push for the legislation to be passed.
579966
The US House of Representatives has approved legislation reorganizing the nation&#39;s intelligence system. The vote was 336 to 75.
44479
The US House of Representatives on Friday approved a Republican-written US spy agency overhaul, setting the stage for a battle with the Senate over controversial immigration measures and the new national intelligence director&#39;s power
289924
The House of Representatives passed   a bill on Thursday that would provide congressional   authorization for President George W. Bush's warrantless   domestic spying program but subject it to new rules.
324743
The House Wednesday passed what could become the first major federal gun control law in over a decade, spurred by the Virginia Tech campus killings and buttressed by National Rifle Association help.
25817
The House of Representatives on  Tuesday approved an energy bill to increase the fuel efficiency  of cars and trucks for the first time since 1975, boost  production of ethanol and cut energy use in light bulbs and  appliances.
505764
Lawmakers reached an agreement yesterday on a Senate bill that clears the way for the first major overhaul of the nation's consumer product safety system in a generation.
464333
(InfoWorld) - In the wake of a recent landmark Supreme Court ruling, patent reform is bubbling toward a boil on Capitol Hill, where advocates in both parties and both chambers are urging timely action on pending legislation and contending with well-financed interest groups on both sides of the issue. "This is a big fight about winners and losers," said Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., adding that he is not entirely satisfied with the pending Patent Reform Act of 2007, which was introduced in the Senate in April. "The question is how do we strike the balance." The Patent Reform Act legislation would make the requirements for obtaining a new patent more stringent, make it easier for rivals to challenge patents, and reduce the penalties for patent violations. Committee chairman Patrick Leahy of Vermont said that he, Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, and a number of other colleagues have been working on the nonpartisan bill for several years and that the existing patent system was designed for a bygone era. A decision by the Supreme Court in April in the case of KSR International vs. Teleflex marked a major clarification of the court's thinking about the granting of patents for new inventions and set a higher bar for what qualifies as an original invention. The ruling has already prompted legal wrangling between VoIP vendor Vonage in its ongoing dispute with Verizon over Internet telephony patents, and legal experts say that the ruling was a direct rebuke to lower courts that have tended to favor patent owners over those challenging the legality of patents that have been issued. Despite strong support from Democratic and Republican leaders in both chambers for change in the patent system, however, passage of the bill into law is not assured.Â  IT behemoths, including Cisco, Apple, Dell, HP, Microsoft, and Oracle, have aligned as the Coalition for Patent Fairness to press for the sweeping changes envisioned in the bill. They maintain that reforms are necessary to reduce costly, sometimes frivolous litigation. However, other technology companies, including InterDigital Communications and Qualcomm, have banded together as the Innovation Alliance and joined the biotechnology and manufacturing sectors to limit changes to the system. They argue that the bill would give patent infringers an advantage. The high stakes involved in the patent issue were illustrated June 6 at a hearing of the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, which was briefly delayed as committee aides tried to locate an extra room for the overflowing crowd. "What we're trying to do here is move the process forward," Sen. Orrin Hatch said in an appeal to lobbyists for compromise once the hearing got started. "There are a number of organizations who could stop this bill." The bill's two main sticking points are a provision that would give the public a new opportunity to review patents after they've been granted, and a provision granting the right for an immediate appeal to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit after a district court has made a pre-trial ruling on the framework that will be used to determine infringement (known as a "claim construction"). Large IT companies and the financial industry support the "post-grant review" of patents, which would allow for a reevaluation of suspect patent claims before companies are forced to go through lengthy, costly litigation, John Squires, chief intellectual property counsel at Goldman, Sachs & Co., told the committee. Opponents countered that the proposed post-grant review process would create an essentially limitless opportunity for rivals to challenge patents. "If a patent can be easily challenged at any time under a low standard of proof, (then) patents will have much less value, and investment predicated upon them will inevitably be diminished," Kathryn Biberstein, senior vice president of Alkermes, a biotechnology company, told the committee in her testimony. "This, in turn, will likely result in fewer cures for diseases and other breakthrough biotechnology products." The biotech industry and the Innovation Alliance also oppose the right for an immediate appeal after a claim construction ruling, arguing that it would encourage appeals, further prolonging cases. But advocates, including Palm senior vice president Mary Doyle, said it would reduce the chance of conducting unnecessary trials and cut down litigation costs. The witnesses were eager to raise two other controversial provisions in the legislation, regarding how damages in patent cases are determined and the expansion of the Patent and Trademark Office's authority to make rules. Doyle and Squires, supporting the bill's "mandatory apportionment" of damages provision, told the committee that damages today can be unreasonably high because the calculation is based on the value of an entire product, not just the patented feature at issue. Countering that argument, Biberstein and Bruce Bernstein, chief intellectual property and licensing officer at InterDigital, said that the provision would replace today's market-oriented valuation of inventions with subjective jury findings. Debate on expanding the PTO's rulemaking authority mirrored the rest of the patent debate with representatives from the financial sector and the Coalition for Patent Reform joining forces in support, while witnesses from the biotechnology sector and the Innovation Alliance cautioned against the change. An identical House version of the Patent Reform Act is pending, having recently won approval by the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Intellectual Property. Leahy said he is eager to prepare the legislation for a vote by the Senate Judiciary Committee, but he did not indicate when that vote might occur.ADVERTISEMENTIBM Information On Demand 2006Industrial Industry Leaders, please join us at IBM's premier information management global event, IBM Information On Demand 2006, October 15-20, Anaheim, CA. More IBM business and technical solutions content in one place than ever before! Select from  over 800 sessions. Register today!
393099
(InfoWorld) - The House Committee on the Judiciary approved far-reaching legislation to reform the nation's patent system Wednesday. The Patent Reform Act of 2007 largely reflects the IT sector's lobbying effort to curtail lengthy, expensive patent infringement lawsuits, but Wednesday's committee deliberations centered on finding compromises acceptable to opponents â namely the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries, manufacturers, and large research universities â so that the bill could win approval. Committee Chairman John Conyers, D-Mich., described the current patent system as inefficient, bogged down by inappropriate litigation rules, unreliably funded, and resulting in patents of "questionable quality."Â  The bill would make it harder to secure a patent and easier for rivals to challenge one, and it would change how courts determine an infringed patent's value.Â  However, the version approved by the committee does not go as far on any of those fronts as the IT industry would have liked, and continued negotiations are underway. "Needless to say, our journey has been rugged," Conyers said, urging members to pass the bill out of committee. "We meet here today with the realization that we haven't finished the discussions. The meetings have gone on almost endlessly in some people's minds because compromises are necessary." The proposal Conyers brought forward addresses two of the most controversial provisions under discussion:Â  How courts determine the damages paid to patent holders by infringers and whether challengers are allowed to review patents after they've been granted. Assessing damages Calling the damages provision the most complex issue, the bill's original sponsor, Rep. Howard Berman, D-Calif., said that allowing judges to determine damages by assessing the value of a component within an invention that was infringed â rather than the value of the entire product â would correct "bizarre and wrong-headed trends" in patent litigation.Â  Originally, the bill mandated that courts calculate damages by such an "apportionment" formula, which the IT industry largely supported.Â  However, the committee agreed to give judges the discretion to decide whether damages should be determined by apportionment, by the market value of the entire invention, or by other means.Â  Several committee members, including Rep. Tom Feeney, R-Fla., said they would like to see further refinement of the provision because Congress canât predict the consequences of the apportionment analysis. "It would be important to give the court flexibility," Feeney said, adding that the bill could unduly diminish the value of some patents.Â  "We are in a whole new world of uncertainty." Promoting higher quality patents In a move that would make it easier to challenge a patent without going through costly litigation â and simultaneously make it harder for inventors to secure patents â the bill allows the Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) to review patents after they've been granted. In response to concerns raised by research universities and others, however, it limits the timeframe for such review. The legislation also makes it harder to secure a patent by giving third parties more opportunity to submit information to the PTO during the application process to ensure that only innovative inventions are patented.Â  The bill moves the patent system from a "first-to-invent" to a "first-to-file" system, but in another nod to large universities, the committee clarified a grace period on filing patent applications for inventors who disclose or publish inventions in advance of seeking a patent. Discouraging excessive litigation In an attempt to reduce abuses in patent litigation and discourage frivolous cases from being filed and non-frivolous cases from being unnecessarily drawn out, two other provisions were heavily debated and amended before the bill was approved: The ability of alleged infringers to charge patent holders with "inequitable conduct," and the patent holder's flexibility in selecting a venue for a case. Currently, alleged infringers can argue that a patent is invalid on the grounds that the holder did not sufficiently disclose information about an invention and thereby engaged in inequitable conduct. The often-used tactic is widely seen as a way to divert attention from the merits of the patent itself.Â  The bill narrows the circumstances under which this defense could be used and gives courts a range of options to remedy such conduct when it is found.Â  In an effort to curb forum shopping, the bill restricts patent holders to four options when choosing a venue to file a suit in.Â  However, the bill provides leeway for individual inventors, universities, and "micro entities" to bring patent cases where they reside. Noting that members of Congress cannot predict the consequences of the sweeping reform legislation, Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, D-Texas, proposed requiring the PTO to conduct periodic studies of the impact of the most controversial provisions.Â  The proposal was enthusiastically approved. The Senate Judiciary Committee is scheduled to continue deliberating its version of the patent reform legislation Thursday.
32597
The House moved toward passage Thursday of the most sweeping rewrite of corporate tax law in nearly two decades, a measure designed to end a nasty trade war with Europe
439727
The U.S. House of Representatives on Friday easily passed a final bill aimed at improving education for millions of children with learning disabilities, with the Senate expected to follow as Congress rushed to complete its work for the year.
250800
Proposed legislation for overhauling the U.S. patent system would either hurt a system that's worked for 200 years, or fix a badly broken mess, or cost more money, or save more, or raise intellectual-property values, or lower them... yes, the lobbyists have been busy on Capitol Hill as the reform debate continues.