[PLUG-TALK] [PLUG] Moved to PLUG-TALK Re: The Patent Show

Keith Lofstrom keithl at kl-ic.com
Wed Jul 27 17:37:14 UTC 2011


On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 8:55 PM, Keith Lofstrom <keithl at kl-ic.com> wrote:
> H.R. 1249, which changes
> the U.S. patent system to the European model,  from "first to invent"
> to "first to file".   That makes it a lot easier for a patent troll
> to file a patent on your great open source idea.

On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 08:48:54AM -0700, Denis Heidtmann wrote:
> I thought that under present law, a patent must be applied for before public
> disclosure.  Is this correct?  Does 1249 change that?  If it does not
> change, does not something disclosed as open source protect it from
> patenting?

I am moving this to plug-talk.

Remember my example of "multiple patents for the same damned thing"?
The patent office is a cash cow for the government.  The top-level
mission is to issue more patents, investing as little hourly effort
as possible, not check their validity.  Validity is decided by the
courts.

A patent battle can cost millions, much of it spend on court fees.
Courts, at least in certain districts like East Texas, are a cash
cow for the government.

Patents are a cash cow for the legal profession.  Most of the 
representatives (like our FORMER Rep. David Wu) are lawyers.  
They represent each other, not you and me.  There is no law
making them tell the truth,  about who they really represent
or anything else.  The only law is that they sound more
plausible than their opponents at election time, that is,
more like what voters are already used to hearing.  

Since only a vanishingly small number of Americans are
"Inventors", the plausible homilies about invention and
innovation go unchallenged.  But in fact most people are
inventors in small to medium ways, and they invent to make
their work or lives better.  Both Denis and I have our names
on more than half a dozen patents.  But we do what we do for
the love of the work, not for an opportunity to go to court. 

All this is great for the Lemelsons and Kearns, and other
inept inventors who are adept at playing the legal system.
Inventors like me, who work to help workers and manufacturers
create better products and systems for the rest of humanity,
are not represented in this process. 

Your open source ideas, designed to make software better, are
fertile ground for the Lemelsons and Kearns and others.  Even
if you patent your idea, they will also, because the same 
idea is decribable many different ways, and patents are weak
against "thesaurus attacks".  If you try to defend your right
to keep using what you invented, you will probably lose,
after spending a lot of money.  After all, if you succeeded,
a lot of glib-talking parasites would have to get honest work.

Keith

P.S. - I do not mean to impugn the honor of most patent
examiners, or most lawyers.  Just as the atrocity of war does
not nullify the bravery of most soldiers, there are many who
work hard to remediate the atrocities inherent in the systems
they serve.  These atrocities persist because the citizens
who vote for this mess do not question the slogans and
absurdities it is built on, and even attack those who do.
The most convincing way to tell a lie is to believe it yourself.

-- 
Keith Lofstrom          keithl at keithl.com         Voice (503)-520-1993
KLIC --- Keith Lofstrom Integrated Circuits --- "Your Ideas in Silicon"
Design Contracting in Bipolar and CMOS - Analog, Digital, and Scan ICs



More information about the PLUG-talk mailing list