Foreigners Receive More Patents than U.S.!
For the first time in U.S. history more patents were issued to foreigners than U.S. residents, by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). According to the USPTO, foreigners received 80,271 patents while U.S. inventors received 77,501 in 2008.[1] Six of the top ten patenting companies in 2008 were foreign. Read more »
USPTO Quality System
David Kappos, Director of the USPTO, stated at an AIPLA meeting, “We are blowing up the quality-measuring system.” Kappos’ stated that the system is “dysfunctional and backwards.” For more information see the article “No Quick End to Backlog in Sight”, at JSOnline.
This is great news for inventors, and the American economy.
Colorado Patent Statistics
The number of patents issued to Colorado inventors has been stagnant since 1998.
The number of patents grew steadily from 1991 to 1998. Since 2004 the number of patents issued to Colorado inventors has declined significantly. This trend is fairly consistent with the national trends. For More information on national trends click here. Read more »
Does Net Neutrality Inhibit Innovation?
Any government restriction on how the internet can operate will by definition limit innovation. The FCC’s Net Neutrality proposal violates the “Rate Law of Innovation”, which states that rate of innovation is directly related to the number of elements that innovators have available to them. The Net Neutrality rule limits how many variables or elements that innovators have to innovate. See the Laws of Innovation for more information. All the major engineers who developed the internet are opposed to the FCC’s Net Neutrality rules. According to Andrew Orlowski, “Engineers fear rash legislation would inhibit the ability of systems engineers to improve latency and jitter issues needed to move data at speed.” See Mr. Orowski’s article for more information. Read more »
Jobs, the Economy and Patents
The book The Invisible Edge, in chapter 8, makes a compelling case that the recession of the 1970s was largely due to the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) antitrust policies that limited the value of patents owned by U.S. companies. The book describes in detail the shameful abuse of government power by the FTC to force Xerox to license all its technology to all comers for a pittance. Xerox spent millions of dollars and over a decade to perfect the plain paper copier. They held numerous patents on the technology that made the plain paper copier possible. In 1975 when Xerox agreed to the FTC consent decree to license their patents, they had almost a 100% market share in plain paper copiers. Just four years later, their market share was down to 14% and most of the rest of the market was controlled by Japanese companies. Read more »
Obviousness – Flow Chart
This is my second post on the nonobviousness standard for patents (35 USC 103). The earlier post focused on the practical questions that an inventor and his attorney face when negotiating with the Patent Office (PTO). This post attempts to provide a rational approach to the nonobviousness requirement.
Once it has been determined that a patent claim is novel, step 10 in the flow chart, there are only two things that can make the invention nonobvious. One is a new result and the other is a new combination that has provides same result in the prior art. At step 12, we determine if the invention has a new result. For instance, Edison’s light bulb had a new result of a high resistance filament. This result is important because it makes it possible to build an economically Read more »
In Search of Jefferson’s Moose
This is an excellent book – up there with Niall Ferguson’s, Ascent of Money. David G. Post, the author, ties the ideas of Thomas Jefferson to the ideas that made the Internet so successful. Post also demonstrates an extensive knowledge of Jefferson, but not to the determent of the story.
Post shows how Jefferson’s mapping of the navigable rivers in Virginia helped him to understand the critical importance of New Orleans and the Mississippi river. The map of the navigable rivers is compared to the connections of the internet. The non-hierarchical nature of the internet avoids a New Orleans type bottleneck. Read more »
Limits of Patentable Subject Matter (35 USC 101)
I was posed the following interesting question, if the constitutional purpose of patent law is to promote science and the useful arts why shouldn’t mathematics be patentable? Clearly, mathematics is useful and writings about mathematics are covered by copyrights. However, “mathematical algorithms” have generally not been considered patentable subject matter.
A possible reasons why mathematics has not been considered to be patentable subject matter is that laws of nature and mathematics describe what is, they are not creations of man. Laws of nature are per se prior art, they clearly existed before man discovered how they worked. While this is a good explanation for why laws of nature are not patentable, is it a good explanation for why mathematics is not patentable? Is Euclidean geometry a product nature or is it a human construct? Euclidean geometry is very helpful in understanding physics, chemistry, and other natural phenomena. However, Relativity shows us that our universe is not Euclidean, but curved. Alternatively, if a Fourier transform is a description of nature, are the different methods of calculating a Fourier transform descriptions of nature? I cannot see how the different methods of calculating Fourier transforms can be considered a description of nature. In my opinion the “per se prior art” reasoning for why natural laws are not patentable does not cover all areas of mathematics. Read more »
About
This blog is devoted to intellectual property innovation, patent law and innovation. The moderator, editor, and main 
author is Dale B. Halling. Mr. Halling is patent attorney and entrepreneur. As a patent attorney, Mr. Halling, has represented numerous Fortune 500 companies including, McDonnell Douglas, Boeing, Motorola, Ameritech, SBC, MCI, Cypress, and numerous technology start-ups. He has helped his clients obtain patents worldwide. Mr. Halling has a BS in Electrical Engineering from Kansas State University, an MS in Physics from the University of Texas at Dallas and a JD from St. Louis University. Mr. Halling is the author of the book “The Decline and Fall of the American Entrepreneur: How Little Known Laws are Killing Innovation.”
For More Information Click Here.
-
Recent
- The High Cost of Marketing and Selling an Invention
- The US Economy and the State of Innovation
- Rent Seeking and Patents
- Open Question to David Kappos & Trademark Community
- Makeup of the CAFC
- Invention – A Financial Analysis
- What is the Economic Impact of Start-ups?
- Restore Patent Funding to Create Jobs
- Another Study Shows Value of Patents
- Are Patents Relevant?
- The Rational Optimist: Excellent Book, Disfigured by Open Source Utopianism
- American Inventors for Patent Reform
-
Links
-
Archives
- September 2010 (2)
- August 2010 (8)
- July 2010 (7)
- June 2010 (6)
- May 2010 (10)
- April 2010 (9)
- March 2010 (13)
- February 2010 (16)
- January 2010 (17)
- December 2009 (12)
- November 2009 (9)
- October 2009 (11)
-
Categories
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
