SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Why don't more low-quality patents get rejected? A recent paper published by the Brookings Institution offers fascinating insights into this question. Written by legal scholars Michael Frakes and Melissa Wasserman, the paper identifies three ways the patent process encourages approval of low-quality patents:
- The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is funded by fees—and the agency gets more fees if it approves an application.
- Unlimited opportunities to refile rejected applications means sometimes granting a patent is the only way to get rid of a persistent applicant.
- Patent examiners are given less time to review patent applications as they gain seniority, leading to less thorough reviews.
None of these observations is entirely new. For example, we have covered the problems created by unlimited re-applications in the past. But what sets Frakes and Wasserman's work apart is that they have convincing empirical evidence for all three theories.
They have data showing that these features of the patent system systematically bias it in the direction of granting more patents. Which means that if we reformed the patent process in the ways they advocate, we'd likely wind up with fewer bogus patents floating around.
Source : These experts figured out why so many bogus patents get approved
(Score: 2) by frojack on Friday December 29 2017, @08:21PM (1 child)
This is already the case. The Applicant has to address prior art in their application.
The patent attorney is supposed to do this again, They are likely to do less of a job than the applicant.
The Patent office will so an even more cursory search. (Usually restricted to their own database).
For every applicant that skimps on a patent search there is a patent attorney that did the same.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by gringer on Saturday December 30 2017, @10:33AM
Not really. The applicant does a token search for prior art, but it's not a proper challenge, and it's in everyone's best interest to not put too much effort into searching for a reason to reject the patent.
Once the patent is awarded, the process would go something like this:
Company 2: Let's make this thing
Company 1: Hey, you can't do that, I've patented that thing you're trying to make
Company 2: Oh really? I don't believe the patent is valid because X
[Patent validity battle ensues, where Company 1 needs to demonstrate X is not sufficient grounds for invalidation]
Ask me about Sequencing DNA in front of Linus Torvalds [youtube.com]