from the explains-a-lot-of-recent-patents dept.
An internal investigation by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office found that some of its 8,300 patent examiners repeatedly lied about the hours they were putting in and many were receiving bonuses for work they did not do. While half of the USPTO's Patent Examiners work from home full time, oversight of the telework program and of examiners based at the Alexandria headquarters was "completely ineffective," investigators concluded.
The internal investigation also unearthed another widespread problem. More than 70 percent of the 80 managers interviewed also told investigators that a "significant" number of examiners did not work for long periods, then rushed to get their reviews done at the end of each quarter. Supervisors told the review team that the practice "negatively affects" the quality of the work. "Our quality standards are low," one supervisor told the investigators. "We are looking for work that meets minimal requirements."
Patent examiners review applications and grant patents on inventions that are new and unique. They are experts in their fields, often with master's and doctoral degrees. They earn at the top of federal pay scale, with the highest taking home $148,000 a year.
But when it came time last summer for the patent office to turn over the findings to its outside watchdog, the most damaging revelations had disappeared. The report sent to Commerce Department Inspector General Todd Zinser concluded that it was impossible to know if the whistleblowers' allegations of systemic abuses were true.
(Score: 2) by naubol on Tuesday August 12 2014, @01:01AM
They might be working on the next physics breakthrough!
(Score: 1) by Buck Feta on Tuesday August 12 2014, @02:46AM
Or reading Soylent News (for the articles).
- fractious political commentary goes here -
(Score: 5, Funny) by Nerdfest on Tuesday August 12 2014, @03:02AM
I'm here for the ascii art.
(Score: 0, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 12 2014, @01:21AM
My understanding is that when a patent is rejected, the applicant can just resubmit, over and over until eventually the examiner cries uncle or they get a different examiner who decides to accept it.
It seems to me that, if that's true, then the job must be very demoralizing and as such I'm not surprised by this story. I would put the blame for this absenteeism on congress for not giving the patent office enough power to do their job effectively.
Ironically, I'd say this is a shining example of how small-government types are completely clueless as to how government works. If you indiscriminately "starve the beast" you just get even shittier results. You can't legislate good governance, but you can pass laws that encourage bad governance.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 12 2014, @02:54AM
Which perfectly proves their point about how government is incompetent and worthless and needs to be shrank even further. You're pretty naive if you think its not intentional; after all, if you campaign on a platform of "Government is incompetent" its in your best interests to prove its incompetence when you're in the position to do so.
(Score: 2) by Tork on Tuesday August 12 2014, @03:56AM
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: 2) by SlimmPickens on Tuesday August 12 2014, @06:36AM
That's exactly what is happening in Australia right now. Tony Abbot spent so long telling everyone that everything is Labours fault and if they would just vote him in then all the problems would disappear that he forgot it was all bullshit initially made up by Nick Minchen.
He forgot that no goverment can control what he told everyone was the Labours fault (well, aside from all the unnecessary tax breaks his side of politics bought votes with during the mining boom), forgot that stuff he made up about the mining tax and carbon tax was just bullshit, forgot that Labour already made all the budgetary cuts that were reasonable and forgot to have any kind of policy in place aprt from "oppose Labour" with the exception of his expensive paid parental leave scheme which he just announced without taking to the party room because he knew he couldn't get the female vote without it. And the "stop the boats" policy which is the most successful policy they have, mainly because they've created a media blackout around it.
The one good thing about it all is that they are doing such a bad job that it might create the conditions for a kind of slingshot effect away from the views of the right (what I call 'reductionist').
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 12 2014, @03:09AM
Pay per application, bonuses to examinees who reject patents payable immediately
Problems solved
(Score: 3, Interesting) by monster on Tuesday August 12 2014, @10:27AM
But then examiners have a perverse incentive to reject lawful applications.
Still better, pay per application, and any patent invalidated later by any court causes examinees' bonuses to be dropped.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 12 2014, @06:25PM
Put the bonuses in escrow.
Any patent that is invalidated later deducts from the account.
-- gewg_
(Score: 5, Insightful) by khallow on Tuesday August 12 2014, @03:32AM
Because small government types obsess over reducing the size of the US Patent and Trademark Office? I think there's an easier explanation. It works well enough for political donors, who collectively want something in place to protect their existing IP, but wouldn't want a competent agency which could actually interfere with their acquisition of new IP.
I wonder what the next thing to be blamed on "small-government types" will be? Immigration policy? Abuses of tax collection? The military-industrial complex? The huge cost of the theoretical social safety nets? No, the problem here as usual is that someone else created yet another bureaucratic monster and now it's the fad of the day to blame it on an unpopular political trend which had nothing to do with the creation of the mess (and was actually spurred by similar messes created in the past).
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 12 2014, @04:27AM
> Because small government types obsess over reducing the size of the US Patent and Trademark Office?
Not in particular, but in case you haven't been paying attention they are quite happy with a blind, across-the-board cut of about 10%. [wikipedia.org] Next time, leave the strawmen in the barn, ok?
(Score: 2) by khallow on Tuesday August 12 2014, @02:58PM
So what? Everyone else went along with it because the alternative was worse. A blind cut might be far from optimal, but at least it was political feasible.
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Tuesday August 12 2014, @03:41PM
> Everyone else went along with it because the alternative was worse.
Like, I don't know, actually talking to each other and agreeing on proper allocation of funds?
Politicians actually doing their jobs isn't a hard concept. Step 1 would be a rule that one chamber of congress has to take a vote on a bill voted by the other, unmodified. The current policy of "majority of the majority", and the ability of a single guy to just stop anything until he gets his bribe, are probably making the founders spin in their graves (see the SMBC on using that for power).
(Score: 3, Insightful) by khallow on Tuesday August 12 2014, @10:36PM
A "proper allocation" is that we cut your squeeze so I can keep my squeeze. Too many parties with too much self-interest are contaminating the decision-making process. And it's not just evil corporations. Even a bunch of Tea Party members are all about cutting everything else so that Social Security and Medicare can keep going as is. All someone has to do to thwart any sort of "proper allocation of funds" is to rile up the people whose funding gets cut by your "proper allocation".
Across the board cuts are IMHO the solution to this political Gordian knot. Everyone shares in the pain so there's far less resistance (no one gets particularly outraged by perceived unfairness of the allocation). The tactic reduces the budget deficit (notice that I don't consider raising taxes in itself a serious solution to this problem since in the absence of any attempt to contain spending, spending just increases to consume the additional revenue) and simultaneously weaken a bit the special interests who are a primary driver of this mess.
Only for someone who ignores reality. We wouldn't be in this situation in the first place, if politicians were doing the jobs we expected of them.
This was a known failure mode at the time which is why they choose several of the peculiar institutions and procedures of the time such as a Senate which was mostly not chosen by popular election and the electoral college. Yet at the same time, they deliberately created situations where a few could block the progress of a majority precisely because they considered to some degree that the above situation was better than alternatives where minorities could easily be ignored.
(Score: 2) by jasassin on Tuesday August 12 2014, @02:55AM
They approve ludicrous patents. Now this? Talk about rubbing salt in the wound.
jasassin@gmail.com GPG Key ID: 0xE6462C68A9A3DB5A
(Score: 3, Insightful) by c0lo on Tuesday August 12 2014, @06:16AM
Rub enough of it and the wound won't get infected.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by AnonTechie on Tuesday August 12 2014, @07:42AM
Is there a patent for that ??
Albert Einstein - "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."