S.23 Patent Bill Unconstitutional
Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 of the United States Constitution states:
To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.
An inventor is a person who creates something new. With the Feinstein amendment voted down, S.23 now called “Invent America Act” changes the U.S. to a “First to File” country. This violates the Constitutional mandate. By changing our patent laws to a first to file rule, Congress is not securing the exclusive rights of inventors. It is taking rights from inventors and giving them the person who games the legal system most effectively – files first.
Congress cannot just ignore the definition of inventor. This is not Alice in Wonderland. The inventor is the person who first creates something. S.23, the “Invent America Act” is unconstitutional.
2 Comments »
Leave a Comment
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
- Quantitative Easing II is Working – Thanks Ben
- David Boundy’s Excellent Analysis of the First to File Issues
- Inventor on Why First-to-File is Bad for Small inventors
- Intellectual Property’s Great Fallacy: Another Rambling Diatribe for Open Source Marxist Utopia
- Senator Feinstein: First-Inventor-to-File a Ruse
- S.23 Patent Bill Unconstitutional
- Patent Reform: “First Inventor to File” Misleading
- Conservative Groups: Patent Reform Bill a Disaster for US
- Fundamentals of Economic Science: An Objectivist Approach
- Science or Religion: Environmental Doomsday Theories
- Déjà vu All Over Again: Undoing the Reagan Revolution
- Patent Deform Act of 2011: Approved by Senate Committee
-
Links
-
Archives
- March 2011 (7)
- February 2011 (8)
- January 2011 (7)
- December 2010 (7)
- November 2010 (7)
- October 2010 (7)
- September 2010 (11)
- August 2010 (8)
- July 2010 (7)
- June 2010 (6)
- May 2010 (10)
- April 2010 (9)
-
Categories
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
Dale,
We disagree (respectfully) on definition of what is an “inventor”.
However, yours is a good idea to look at the Constitution (and also see the Preamble thereto” To Promote the general welfare for ourselves and our posterity).
I would urge you to focus on the part of Art. I clause 8 that says: “To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing …”
How does 1st to file give inventors “security”?
It doesn’t.
It gives them the scares and the runs.
How does 1st to file give the public promotion of science?
It doesn’t.
It forces inventors to stop diligent perfection of their ideas and to instead spend resources in the race to be first at the Patent Office steps.
Comment by step back | March 6, 2011 |
Step back,
I agree that it does not promote the useful arts and sciences. However, the preamble is not limiting, just like it is not limiting in patent law (generally). The clause states the “rights” of inventors. Rights have to be understood in terms of Locke’s natural rights because that is the context of the founders. This means that inventors have rights in their inventions because they are the creator’s of their inventions. This also means that the word “Shall” is not an option, it is just placing the responsibility with Congress instead of the executive branch or the judicial branch.
If you look up the definition of an inventor, the answer that is consistent with patents is: inventor – someone who is the first to think of or make something. Note it says first. If it did not say first why would we have a novelty requirement?
Comment by dbhalling | March 6, 2011 |