Patent Reform

The Wall Street Journal reports that the Patent Reform Act is in the Senate again. Not long ago, the Patent Reform Act was supposed to be a done deal, but they are still considering some changes, including the hotly contested damages provisions. I think this is still going to take a while. A compromise is possible, but it will take some time to find an acceptable middle-ground.

Trademark Value

Intellectual property can certainly be very valuable and this story in the Wall Street Journal is just another example. The "Budweiser" trademark is valuable enough that these two breweries have been fighting about it for a very long time. Even though the Czech brewery won this round of the battle, I doubt the war is over.

Patent Reform

The Patent Reform Act is having some trouble getting passed, and all because of the concern over limiting damages for infringement. After considering this, I would have to say that limiting damages is a bad idea. There are too many companies that could then make and sell infringing devices that would just figure the cost of damages into the cost of the device. Patent infringement would be just another cost of doing business. This is dangerous ground because not only does it allow for the much greater possibility of patent infringement, but those companies that innovate will be less inclined to innovate because they will not be able to protect their invention to the fullest extent. All in all, the Patent Reform Act is not worth the problems.

Patent-Judge Pilot Program

The House of Representatives has passed a bill to create a pilot program that would help give district court judges more expertise in patent cases. I certainly know plenty of patent attorneys that think judges need all the help they can get, but I do not happen to agree with that. The judges I have seen in the court want to understand patent law and get the principles down pretty well. This program will be a great aid for those that wish to participate, but I do not foresee huge changes.

Patent Reform

According to Reuters, Sen. Hatch is claiming that patent reform is just around the corner. This may not be a bad idea, but I would have to say that the bad outweighs the good in this instance. The good is that the Patent Reform Act would make it more difficult to find inequitable conduct against a patent practitioner. The positive effects of this will hopefully include promoting more open discussions between the PTO and patent practitioners because the patent practitioner is not as worried about inequitable conduct claims. The bad news for the act would be the limitation in patent infringement damages. This is a provision that will only help big, electronic, tech companies because with damages limited to a certain amount, they can choose to just infringe a patent as opposed to actually negotiate a fair license or innovate around the patent. This provision would help many more companies than it would help, and quite likely cost many employees at those companies their jobs. Being a resident of Utah, I understand that Sen. Hatch has a great interest in intellectual property matters. I just wish he really understood them a little better.

Cybersquatting

Reuters reports on the increased number of cybersquatting cases. This is not terribly surprising in these economic times because many people will be looking for a way to make some quick, relatively easy money. The big problem for those people looking to make a quick buck is that most cybersquatting cases where a genuine, famous trademark is being used by someone else make sure there is no unacceptable use or purpose to the website and are quick to award the trademark owner what they deserve.

Court Watching

This article from Mark Sherman at the Boston Globe is one of many we will see for the next few years. Especially at the beginning of a presidential term, everyone likes to comment on which Justices they think will be leaving the Supreme Court. And it seems like they are mostly wrong every time. Even based on this article, I would say Justice John Paul Stevens is the only Justice likely to retire in Pres. Obama's present term of office. Of course, I could be wrong.

Obama and Copyrights

This will be an interesting case as the AP sues the artist behind the Obama "Hope" posters. I would consider this just more proof that a good idea needs to be protected.

Patent Reform

The attempt to reform the damages in patent infringement litigation is an issue that will not go away soon. Both sides have a lot of money involved and both will be willing to fight this to the end. I do not have a preference for which side ultimately prevails, but I do sense that certain changes will almost certainly be made.

Patent Portfolio

This article by Donalee Moulton discusses the value of patent portfolios, a value certain companies may be overlooking at this time of economic stress. It can be very difficult at a time like this, but there is opportunity in these times. Companies that are aware of the opportunities and understand how to maximize the value of their assets will be able to take advantage of these hidden opportunities.

Bilski Decision

Patently-O has a great round-up of the amicus briefs filed in the Bilski v. Doll case. The Supreme Court should certainly hear this case and clarify the rule in this matter. This is a decision that will have a huge impact on business. The ability to patent software is considered very important by those in the business, which is evidenced by the fact that software patent applications still take quite a while to get through the PTO. I look forward to the Supreme Court's decision.

Patent Rules

According to this report from Reuters, Congress is again trying to reform the patent rules, although this legislation regarding damages for patent infringement does not appear to be related to patent prosecution rules. This will be an interesting argument and it will also be interesting to find out where Congress decides to draw the line regarding calculation of damages. Both sides clearly have a point. Industries that require more components will want less damages for patent infringement because there is a greater likelihood they will be facing multiple patent infringement claims. Drug companies and smaller industries will want the damages to stay the same, if not increase, because almost their entire business depends on one or two patents. I suspect there will be some sort of compromise where no one is completely happy.

Pres. Obama and Biologics

The Associated Press reports that Pres. Obama would like to find a way to streamline the approval process for "generic" biologic drugs. The article does not say anything about shortening the patent term for these drugs, but it does talk about making sure drug companies do not make small changes to patented processes and get additional years of patent protection. I would have to agree with Pres. Obama on this matter because the patent system is designed to allow people to benefit from their invention for a limited time, and that time should not be extended frivolously. If a way can be determined that allows a safe and faster approval of generic biologic drugs, I think that would be great.

In related stories, the market appears to be over-reacting a bit to this news. Biologic drug company stocks appear to be dropping. I will leave it to other, more qualified persons to comment on any possible market trends.