The President Signs New Patent Law

Dylan80 said:
You guys seeing this as "bad for the small guy" must be watching Fox News only... so you only hear the nonsense, complaining like Fox News gets paid (political bias channel, not #1 news channel, unfairest of all news corps, and certainly not America's news HQ, rather republican news HQ, IN ACTUALITY AND REALITY)

This (actually) makes it easier for small inventors. They can now get the investment money to get these patents done (see my post above explaining why).

Basically..... nobody small can get investments for patents these days, all because it takes over 3 years. because of this long, questionable gap of uncertainty, most investors are drawn AWAY because of this long wait. They must pay 1-3 years of just 'waiting' and after that it still might go through.

so now........ investors will have LESS RISK, thus increasing investments into American inventions.

Fox News fails yet again at telling the TRUTH.
Click to expand...

This does make sense........ but now, a company can patent a box like object, and sue everyone.... for EVERYTHING box-like. I was unaware that Fox news agree with me.

And you would think that you can't patent a box like object or a wheel, but looking at the ipad patent on the design ( a rectangle with a screen and a button ) makes me think otherwise.
 
Steve said:
The President has signed the first major patent law change since 1952 into law today. The commander-in-chief said "we can't afford to drag our feet any longer." Apparently foot dragging on everything else is still okay. ;)
Click to expand...

The change fixes none of the problems like patent trolls and hyper expensive litigation, but do make it much, much more difficult for small inventors, individuals, etc., to be able to effectively apply for and pursue patents.

It's a massive give away to the huge corporations such as Wal-Mart, Microsoft and the Chinese.
If you cannot see this then you did not read the law.
 
Tokamak said:
The biggest change this makes is it changes the system from a "first to invent" to a "first to file" system. It will speed things up and make it cheaper simply because the patent office won't have to spend a ton of time dealing with arguments over who invented something first. It will now simply look at who filed first, which is a whole lot easier to determine. We're one of the last 1st world countries to do it this way.
Click to expand...

The downside is well have millions patenting ideas the have zero capability of inventing from, screwing everyone that can produce, and stifling innovation. IF the above paragraph is correct.

So, the the simple idea of farting in a tin can could now be feasibly patentable !
 
fattypants said:
As if independent inventors didn't have it hard enough. This law virtually guarantees that if you don't work for an existing megacorp with a giant patent war chest, you're fucked forever.

This "reform" looks a lot like corruption to me...
Click to expand...

It looks like corruption because it IS.
 
CAPPING OBAMA.jpg
 
so the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. what's new? the prez drives a lambo, now that's what I wanna see.
 
TechLarry said:
The downside is well have millions patenting ideas the have zero capability of inventing from, screwing everyone that can produce, and stifling innovation. IF the above paragraph is correct.

So, the the simple idea of farting in a tin can could now be feasibly patentable !
Click to expand...

Sorry beat you to it, its under the Oxy-Acetylene for the poor.:D
 
silat said:
The change fixes none of the problems like patent trolls and hyper expensive litigation, but do make it much, much more difficult for small inventors, individuals, etc., to be able to effectively apply for and pursue patents.
Click to expand...

Please explain how it does this.

TechLarry said:
So, the the simple idea of farting in a tin can could now be feasibly patentable !
Click to expand...

No it's not. The standards for what constitutes a patent have not changed. In fact this bill opens up more avenues for challenging the validity of patents.
 
piscian18 said:
Patenting drugs should be illegal period. I don't care what defense people want to use. Drugs should not be sold for profit. It's fucking disgusting.
Click to expand...

Without drug patents, drug companies wouldn't do drug research. So, you want the government to take over drug research. What is it that the government does so well that gives you so much faith in the government? Socialism is fucking disgusting, and pretty damn stupid, too.
 
WhyYouLoveMe said:
Did Ron Paul vote yes or no on this thing? That's all that really matters. ;)
Click to expand...

Patents have a role to play in encouraging innovation. While I do not have a plan for patent reform yet, I would want to work with Congress to make sure that the US patent system encourages and rewards innovation. Making sure the patent system is fair to small business and entrepreneurs, rewards the actual inventors of a product, and does not tilt the playing field to large corporations will be a priority in my administration's approach to patent law. - Ron Paul

The patent bill that has just become law is in total opposition to Ron Paul's always honorable position.

BTW, I think law new Patent bill is unconstitutional. The Constitution provides patents 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 This new law throws hot the Constitutional and historical right of inventors and gives patents to first filers.
 
Stone Cold said:
Without drug patents, drug companies wouldn't do drug research. So, you want the government to take over drug research. What is it that the government does so well that gives you so much faith in the government? Socialism is fucking disgusting, and pretty damn stupid, too.
Click to expand...

You drew me in."Socialism is fucking disgusting, and pretty damn stupid, too" Your government is Socialist, just less so in the public domain. All the trillions and billions your government just handed out to Wall St. in 2009, all the tax breaks Corporations get. Thats called Socialism for the rich. Up here we call that Corporate Welfare. By the way Reps and Dems do it. I have a question for you. Your 12 trillion in the hole, how much of that debt did the ordinary taxpayers get and how much went to the Corporations and the Money Handling Whores.
 
Uncle said:
Your government is Socialist, just less so in the public domain. All the trillions and billions your government just handed out to Wall St. in 2009, all the tax breaks Corporations get. Thats called Socialism for the rich.
Click to expand...

The US: Government by the rich, for the rich. The same the world around.

So, it's rather stupid when working people want bigger government. Someone against drug patents is really someone who doesn't think the drug companies are big enough, but should be the size of government by being the government.
 
Ualdayan said:
You know what makes it look even worse?

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/08/business/patent-bill-could-save-a-law-firm-millions.html?_r=2
Click to expand...

It figures......should have known. The Corps pretty much run government around pretty freely.

Dylan80 said:
You guys seeing this as "bad for the small guy" must be watching Fox News only...
Fox News fails yet again at telling the TRUTH.
Click to expand...

Fox didn't come up at all until YOU mentioned it.
I haven't even the faintest idea if they even covered the story or not. You assume plenty. I predict this won't change a thing, and it will be business as usual - in a different flavor....but time will tell.
 
Stone Cold said:
The US: Government by the rich, for the rich. The same the world around.

So, it's rather stupid when working people want bigger government. Someone against drug patents is really someone who doesn't think the drug companies are big enough, but should be the size of government by being the government.
Click to expand...

The Majority of Working people don't want bigger government, they want a government that also looks after their interests, not just the corporate interests. This bullshit idea that whats good for Corporations is good for the rest of the country is Hog wash. If that was the case why is America in the economic trouble its in now, Corporations have had a free reign for the last 40 years and where has it gotten America. Theirs a point when someone with brains in government asks the question how many more years do you continue on the same road before you realize that the system is sick and needs to be changed.
 
Not that I don't disagree there may be corruption here - but socialism is government/community ownership of the means of production. The government being corrupt and giving millions/billions to privately owned coroporations does not equal socialsim.
 
TwistedAegis said:
Not that I don't disagree there may be corruption here - but socialism is government/community ownership of the means of production. The government being corrupt and giving millions/billions to privately owned coroporations does not equal socialsim.
Click to expand...

"The government being corrupt and giving millions/billions to privately owned coroporations does not equal socialsim".Your not that far off, Government(Corporations) do own most of the wealth in the USA. !% of the top wealthy own 30 percent of the wealth."1998, the richest 1 percent of households owned 38 percent of all wealth(Edward Wolff is a professor of economics at New York University". "Paul Buchheit, from DePaul University, revealed, "From 1980 to 2006 the richest 1% of America tripled their after-tax percentage of our nation's total income, while the bottom 90% have seen their share drop over 20%." Robert Freeman added, "Between 2002 and 2006, it was even worse: an astounding three-quarters of all the economy's growth was captured by the top 1%."
So if you want to look at it your way,"but socialism is government/community ownership of the means of production". put your blinders back on and don't believe that Government, through Corporations don't own America.
 
TwistedAegis said:
Not that I don't disagree there may be corruption here - but socialism is government/community ownership of the means of production. The government being corrupt and giving millions/billions to privately owned coroporations does not equal socialsim.
Click to expand...



Oligarchy is a form of power structure in which power effectively rests with a small number of people. These people could be distinguished by royalty, wealth, family ties, corporate, or military control. The word oligarchy is from the Greek words olígos, "a few" and the verb archo, "to rule, to govern, to command". Such states are often controlled by a few prominent families who pass their influence from one generation to the next.

Also another aspect of patents is the Invention Secrecy Act of 1951. This allows the government to "ban" anything that it considers could compromise the government or economy.

A secrecy order bars the award of a patent, orders that the invention be kept secret, restricts the filing of foreign patents, and specifies procedures to prevent disclosure of ideas contained in the application. The only way an inventor can avoid the risk of such imposed secrecy is to forgo patent protection.

By the end of fiscal year 1991, the number of patent secrecy orders stood at 6,193. Many such orders were imposed on individuals and organizations working without government support. This number shrank for each fiscal year thereafter, until 2002. Since 2002, the number of secrecy orders has grown, with 5,002 secrecy orders in effect at the end of fiscal year 2007.

The types of inventions classified under this Act is itself a secret, but most of the inventions which are now no longer secret but once were secret have been in areas with high military significance, such as cryptography and weapons development.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top