Posted on 08/06/2011 9:57:40 PM PDT by Rabin
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said Tuesday that the first jobs bill to move after the recess will be the patent reform legislation… Reid and bill sponsor Senator Patrick Leahy said "the bill, is expected to create 200,000 jobs."
The patent reform as job stimulus is endorsed by the White House, too, Obama saying at a June 29 press conference, "Right now, Congress can send me a bill that would make it easier for entrepreneurs to patent a new product or idea.
Naaancy Pelosi, demanded that lawmakers kill the bill or at least remove Section 18, a little-known provision that had cleared the Senate easily. Section 18 would create a new process at the Patent and Trademark Office that could invalidate existing "business method" patents -- but only for "financial services" issues.
(Excerpt) Read more at http: ...
Rab sees a lot of 0 & Cronies push for first thing on the plate. Kinda interesting.
I guess it’s time to turn all intellectual property over to the Chicoms.
“....endorsed by the (Red)White House, too,....
Well....’nuff said.
It MUST be CRAP.
patents keep technological advances
from reaching consumers.
HUH??? Patents protect the intellectual rights of inventors so they can make money from them. This ENCOURAGES technological advances and makes it possible for them to get to consumers. Patents actually document, for all the world to see, technological advances. Others can read them, and improve upon them.
Where did you get the idea that patents discouraged technological advances?
Exactly.
There’s talk of reducing the time of patent exclusivity for pharmaceuticals. That means that drug companies won’t hold the patents for their drugs long enough to recoup the costs of developing the drug. The statists in congress want to get cheap generics on the market faster for the beleaguered masses.
Since it takes an average of 10 years and 1 billion dollars to develop a drug, pharma companies won’t be able to have the cash to do research and development. They would have to raise prices on the drugs or stop research (or be funded by the Fed?).
I’m sure there thinking is that if they can remove intellectual property from people more quickly that others will come in and ramp up production of that product (or process, etc.) Ultimately, there will be less incentive to create.
By the way, you are spot on about patents encouraging advances.
I think patents keep technological advances from reaching consumers because they allow companies to feel safe and lessen the motivation to innovate as they think they’ve got the “patent space covered”. Moreover, “First to File” will increase the burden on inventors to file what I call scope patents which outline the invention before defining the details. That takes time away from inventing. If it really does come down a legal battle, notes written in pen (or even pencil) in the hard bound lab notebook should be enough.
Once upon a time I did pharmaceutical work. In no industry is the patent process more screwed up than in pharmaceuticals. The process takes far too long, is far too expensive and in the end benefits the corporate bureaucrats far more than consumers.
Innovate, innovate, innovate. That’s the solution.
Maybe your notes SHOULD BE enough, but they AREN'T enough. You can have notes engraved in diamonds, and you're out of luck if someone applies for a patent before you do. Your only hope is a "Defensive Publication". This tells the rest of the world what your idea is. That doesn't give you exclusive rights, but it least prevents others from getting exclusive rights.
“You can have notes engraved in diamonds, and you’re out of luck if someone applies for a patent before you do.”
That hasn’t been my experience.
Not only the patent process, but the industry is being strangled by regulations. Even publishing trial results in peer reviewed journals has become more difficult over the last few years (industry=evil; academia=good).
Sadly, most of big pharma signed on with the health-care takeover.
You engrave your notes in diamonds?
Yeah. The dirty secret is that pharmaceuticals love the FDA requirements because it increases their costs which they pass on to the consumer and then make more money by justifying higher profits. A process only a failed med school student could love.
I assumed you were writing metaphorically.
“I won’t insult your intelligence by suggesting that you really believe what you just said.” W.F.B. Jr.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.