Techies oppose US patent reform bill
91990
Mr. WebTV mounts forces More than 430 organizations spanning all fifty US states have fired off a letter urging Senate leaders to oppose a bill that would overhaul the country's patent system. And that includes tech outfits like Qualcomm and AmberWave.â¦
570009
BRUSSELS -- The European Union's (E.U.'s) planned software patent rules represent a major threat to interoperability unless specific exemptions are made to the legislation, participants at a conference on the issue heard on Tuesday.
724272
(InfoWorld) - A group of five Republican senators is seeking a delay in legislation, supported by several large tech vendors, that would overhaul the U.S. patent system. The five, including Senators Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Sam Brownback of Kansas, have asked for more hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee moves ahead with the Patent Reform Act, which is scheduled to be amended and approved in a Thursday hearing. The five sent a letter Monday to the Judiciary Committee asking for more hearings. "Many prominent American businesses on the cutting edge of innovation are expressing concerns about the impact of sweeping patent reform," said the letter, also signed by Senators Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, Jon Kyl of Arizona and Jeff Sessions of Alabama. "These concerns merit thoughtful deliberation." Many observers have called the Patent Reform Act the most sweeping reform of U.S. patent laws in decades. The bill would make it tougher for inventors to obtain new patents, make it easier to challenge patents, and reduce the legal penalties for patent violations. Microsoft Corp., Cisco Systems Inc. and IBM Corp. have praised the bill, saying it's too easy for the owners of questionable patents to sue tech companies and collect large damages or shut down entire product lines with court injunctions when one small piece of a product allegedly infringes a patent. "This important measure ensures that our patent system continues to foster innovation and economic growth by promoting improvements in patent quality [and] discouraging litigation abuse," Microsoft said in a statement when the bill was introduced. But five Republican senators raised concerns about the bill, echoed by some small tech companies and other members of the Coalition for 21st Century Patent Reform, a group calling for less sweeping changes to the U.S. patent system. The senators questioned the bill's attempt to apportion patent award damages. The bill would limit the damages a patent holder can collect when an infringing technology is part of a larger product, based on the value of the patented technology itself, instead of the value of the larger product. Courts now generally consider the value of the larger product when assessing damages. The senators also questioned the bill's provisions to allow new ways to challenge patents after the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has granted them. These changes "need to be more carefully examined to ensure that they do not undermine innovation, increase frivolous litigation, or undermine property rights," the letter said. The letter also calls on the committee to look harder at ways to improve patent quality.
165591
A coalition of technology and telecommunications vendors will oppose a plan to give U.S. public safety agencies a new wireless spectrum.
724473
(InfoWorld) - Two IT trade groups, as well as Microsoft, expressed disappointment after the U.S. Senate failed to move ahead with a comprehensive immigration reform bill that would include a higher annual cap on visas for highly skilled workers. In a vote Thursday, the Senate failed to cut off debate on the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act and move the bill forward for a vote. The bill, which critics say provides amnesty to illegal aliens living in the United States, also would have expanded exemptions to the cap on the controversial H-1B visa program, a move supported by many tech vendors. The bill would increase the annual H-1B cap from 65,000 to 115,000 and exempt all foreign students who have earned a master's degree or higher from a U.S. university from the annual cap. Right now, there's a 20,000 annual limit on exemptions for students with master's degree and higher. The Information Technology Association of America (ITAA), a trade group, called on the U.S. Congress to move ahead with legislation addressing only high-skilled visas, including H-1Bs and EB "green card" visas, not other immigration issues. The ITAA was "tremendously disappointed" by the Senate's failure to move the bill forward, ITAA president and CEO Phil Bond said in a statement. "Our own immigration system is restricting America's ability to compete, to grow, and to prosper," Bond said. "Congress must find a way to remove this chokehold." The Software & Information Industry Association (SIIA) said it was "profoundly disappointed" in the Senate's action. Without the immigration bill, the U.S. "high-tech industry will be challenged to find the skilled workers it needs and therefore put at a significant disadvantage to its global competitors," SIIA President Ken Wasch said in a statement. CompaniesÂ such asÂ Microsoft will be hurt by the failure to pass the bill, said Pamela Passman, the company's vice president for global corporate affairs. Comprehensive immigration reform is "desperately needed," she said in a statement. U.S.-based tech worker groups such as the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers-USA (IEEE-USA) have opposed a higher H-1B cap, arguing that companies use the program to hire foreign workers for less money than unemployed U.S. workers would receive. This month, a video surfaced on the Internet showingÂ lawyers talking about how to cheat the skilled-worker visa system.
512231
Intel's general counsel calls for patent reform to move forward in Congress.
632532
OCTOBER 04, 2004  - Some things are patently ridiculous. One is the US patent system, an institution in desperate need of reform.
753009
(InfoWorld) - Five consumer groups have given their support to legislation that would overhaul the U.S. patent system, saying the bill would create fairer penalties for infringement. The Patent Reform Act of 2007 could come before the U.S. House of Representatives for a vote as soon as this week despiteÂ objections from some labor unions, small inventors, and some small tech vendors. The bill, backed by several large tech vendors, also found support from Consumer Federation of America, Electronic Frontier Foundation, Knowledge Ecology International, Public Knowledge, and U.S. Public Interest Research Group. "Numerous flaws have emerged within the current patent system that can foster poor quality patents and invite uncertainty that inflates the risk and cost of litigation, especially in the areas of software and online services," the consumer advocacy groups said in a Friday letter to congressional leaders. The groups support two controversial sections of the bill that allow for a new way to challenge patents after they've been granted and change the way patent awards are calculated based on apportionment of damages. Currently, courts generally consider the value of the entire product when a small piece of the product infringes a patent, but supporters of the bills want Congress to base damages only on the value of the infringing piece. The apportionment provision would "encourage courts to limit damages for infringement so that they bear some relationship to the actual value of the damage to the patent owner," the groups said. The bill's post-grant review process would allow challenges within a year of a patent being granted by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. "This provision would provide a comparatively inexpensive and quick means to ensure the validity of issues patents before litigation becomes necessary," the groups said. Tech vendors, including Microsoft, IBM, and Cisco, have argued that the USPTO often approves questionable patents and that it's too easy for patent holders to sue, collect huge damages, and shut down product lines that have a small infringing piece. But since late July, three labor unions, including the giant AFL-CIO, have written letters to congressional leaders raising objections to the patent-reform legislation. The United Steelworkers letter said nearly 70 percent of patents filed in the U.S. come from manufacturing firms. "These bills would allow an endless loop of legal challenges after patents are awarded that will make it more difficult for U.S. patent holders to prevail against frivolous challenges," the letter said. The Coalition for 21st Century Patent Reform, whose members include Motorola, SanDisk, and Texas Instruments, has also opposed the legislation. "We believe a number of senators and members of Congress ... have expressed concerns with the bill and a desire to further work on the bill," coalition spokesman Bill Mashek, said earlier this month. The Senate Judiciary Committee has approved its own version of the Patent Reform Act, and that bill is awaiting action in the full Senate.
339297
Key House panel is all for introducing a patent reform bill, but agreeing on details could prove a daunting task.
707543
Tomorrow morning, the Senate Judiciary Committee will hold a new round of hearings continuing the debate over language in S. 1145, the Patent Reform Act of 2007. This morning, a coalition of firms ranging in stature from the Guymon, Oklahoma Chamber of Commerce to Apple, Cisco, Intel, and Microsoft urged Committee chairman Sen. Patrick Leahy (D - Vt.) to get the debate portion over with.
152481
A House committee yesterday approved patent-reform legislation the technology sector has sought for years as a way to reduce the number of costly patent-infringement lawsuits.
575654
Patent overhaul legislation thatÂ passed the U.S. House of Representatives FridayÂ still faces significant opposition as it heads to the Senate, opponents said.
724627
(InfoWorld) - Technology industry executives are pushing the U.S. Congress to reform the way patents are issued in order to process them more quickly while also making sure they are legitimate. Patent reform was one of the major issues discussed at the Tech Policy Summit Monday in San Jose, California. Patent reform legislation considered, but not passed, in Congress last year is expected to be reintroduced. Among the key provisions sought is the hiring of more patent review specialists by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, which one critic at the conference said has a backlog of as many as 1 million applications. Another provision would make it more difficult for so-called patent "trolls" to acquire a patent, claim another company infringed on it and then force the company to pay a settlement in order to keep its business going. Lastly, reform advocates seek an improvement in the quality of patents, pointing to cases where patents are issued for innovations that are not unique. They also propose a post-patent review process. In a speech Monday night at the summit, Deborah Platt Majoras, chairman of the U.S. Federal Trade Commission, endorsed the idea of post-patent review. "Patents are not a driver of innovation, they are an impediment to innovation," said Mark Lemley, a professor of law at Stanford University Law School, speaking at the summit. "Everyone has an example of silly patents, such as the cat exerciser laser pen," Lemley said, but the problems with the patent law are more serious than that. Often, one company asserts a patent right against another company and forces that company to stop production until the patent issue is resolved. "The patent holdup forces the company to settle for more money than the patent is worth," Lemley said. There are also delays in the process of approving patents. SAP AG, the enterprise software maker, once had to wait 44 months until a patent application was approved, said Tim Crean, chief intellectual property officer and a member of the Coalition for Patent Fairness, an industry group advocating reform. An official of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office said the agency is planning to hire 1,200 patent specialists in fiscal year 2008. The patent office receives half of its patent applications electronically and wants to increase that number. Last year it approved 350,000 patents. But some at the summit want Congress toÂ move cautiously on patent reform. A group called the Innovation Alliance was recently formed to protect companies that patent technology but don't manufacture it. Taraneh Maghame, vice president and emerging technologies counsel for Tessera Technologies, said attempts to limit the rights of companies to defend patent rights could harm legitimate patent protection efforts of some companies. Tessera develops chip packaging technology and licenses it to chip manufacturers, such as Intel. "Not all of the tech industry is behind patent reform," Maghame said. Close to 300 people, including tech executives, advocacy groups and government officials, were expected to attend the Tech Policy Summit, which continues Tuesday.
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!
661758
(InfoWorld) - Alumni of a major Indian university want the U.S. Congress to take separate action to passÂ H-1B visaÂ legislation that went down with the immigration reform bill thatÂ failed in CongressÂ last week. Members of the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) alumni association, meeting for a three-day conference in Santa Clara, California, said Friday that they are hoping to get a separate vote on an immigration bill provision that would increase the number of visas granted to highly skilled engineers coming from abroad to work at U.S. technology companies. "Almost as soon as the bill died, there was talk of piecemeal moves to get parts of that bill passed," said Umang Gupta, chairman and CEO of Keynote Systems, a company that measures the technical performance of Web sites. He's also chairman of the board of PAN IIT, the alumni group hosting the conference, which has drawn close to 4,000 people. The legislation would increase the limit of H-1B visas to be granted every year to 115,000 from 65,000 today. Backers say the extra visas are needed because there aren't enough qualified U.S. engineers to do the work U.S. companies need done. Opponents say the visas just make it possible for U.S. companies to hire foreigners at lower wages than they would have to pay U.S. hires. The legislation would also continue to allow 20,000 visas per year to applicants who have advanced degrees from U.S. colleges and universities. Today, about half of the graduates of U.S. engineering schools are non-Americans, many of whom have to return to their home countries to find work when they should be allowed to work here and contribute to U.S. economic growth, said Pradeep Khosla, dean of the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering at Carnegie Mellon University in Pennsylvania. "The day this country limits the free flow of skilled immigrants coming into this country, that's the day we start going downhill," said Khosla. Another IIT alum, Yogen Dalal, managing director at Mayfield Fund, a venture capital firm, noted that in the early 1990s, some in Silicon Valley thought they would be overcome by the Japanese. But the success of valley companies like Google and Apple, which introduced its iPhone a week ago, shows it remains a center for innovation. "Wealth is being created by innovation right here in [Silicon Valley]. Economic value is being created here. The work force is just being redistributed," Dalal said. The H1-B discussion is happening against the backdrop of the loss of thousands of jobs in recent years, particularly in Silicon Valley, as companies outsourced work to lower-wage markets in countries like India. But as more work is done in India,Â wage inflationÂ has begun to narrow the pay gap between India and the U.S. And in some cases, Indian companies have begun moving jobs to the U.S., said Arjun Malhotra, chairman and CEO of Headstrong, an outsourcing consulting firm. "If you look at the issue today, it's not outsourcing, it's global sourcing. You go to wherever the best resources are available to do that job," said Malhotra. The Indian Institute of Technology was created in 1950, three years after India gained its independence from Great Britain. It has about 100,000 alumni, 25,000 of whom live and work in the U.S.
741281
Trade group says chipset tech in some phones runs afoul of patents at the center of Qualcomm's battle with Broadcom.
564079
The U.S. technology industry has faced dozens of lawsuits by &quot;patent speculators&quot; in recent years, and it&#39;s time for Congress to fix problems with the patent system, Intel&#39;s general counsel said Monday.In the last 21 months, U.S. technology vendors have contended with 193 patent infringement lawsuits, and 70 percent of them came from patent speculators -- &quot;people who buy up patents for the purpose of litigating them,&quot; said Bruce Sewell, Intel&#39;s executive vice president and general counsel, at a patent forum.By contrast, companies in the pharmaceutical industry have been defendants in 28 patent infringement lawsuits during the same stretch, and 24 of those lawsuits have been between competitors, he said.Patent lawsuit reform is needed to fix the problem with patent speculators -- called patent trolls by some people -- Sewell said, speaking at a&#160;patent reform&#160;forum in Washington, D.C. Patent reform legislation pending in the U.S. Senate doesn&#39;t target legitimate inventors, he said.&quot;We&#39;re not talking about individual inventors who sue for patent infringement,&quot; Sewell said. &quot;We&#39;re talking about patent speculators who warehouse patents and use those patents to go after successful companies.&quot;But Hans Sauer, associated general counsel at the Biotechnology Industry Organization (BIO), called the Patent Reform Act, a version of which&#160;passed the House of Representatives&#160;in September, a &quot;very patent-hostile bill.&quot; In the Senate, the bill has&#160;stalled over objections&#160;from the biotech and pharmaceutical industries, as well as inventors and some labor unions.The House version of Patent Reform Act, supported by several large tech vendors including Microsoft and IBM, would allow courts to change the way they assess damages in patent infringement cases. 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.&quot;Not all patents are identical,&quot; Sewell said. &quot;Some patents are more important in a product, and some patents are less important.&quot;The bill would also allow a new way to challenge patents within one year after they&#39;ve been granted.Changes in the way patents are enforced could hurt innovation, Sauer said. The bill could diminish incentives for the health industry to innovate in the coming years, he said.&quot;Will I, 30 years from now, pay $10 less for an iPod and have a 10 percent less chance that Alzheimer&#39;s medicine will be available?&quot; he said.It is difficult to predict the effects of the patent reform legislation, added Anat Hakim, a patent lawyer with Foley &amp; Lardner, the law firm that sponsored the patent forum.Sewell complained that there&#39;s a small &quot;cottage industry&quot; of patent speculators that have sprung up. &quot;The concern is that we don&#39;t end up encouraging another cottage industry,&quot; Hakim said.The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled on several patent questions in recent years, and the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office is instituting new rules later this year, Sauer noted. Adding a patent overhaul bill on top of those changes is &quot;a lot to happen at once,&quot; he said.But Sewell said the changes are needed for the IT industry, if not biotech. &quot;You have a group of companies that are happy with the status quo, and are saying, &#39;Don&#39;t change it; it&#39;s not broken,&#39;&quot; he said. &quot;That&#39;s fine, but it&#39;s broken for a lot of other people.&quot;