Recent testimony before the Senate Subcommittee on patent reform Dr. Nathan p. Myhrvold ignores strong rights for small inventors and companies within the scope of the patent. Coming from a now rich man who easily you could join forces of large companies, it is refreshing that Dr. Myhrvold has rewritten the story nor forgotten otherwise where wine.
(Many thanks to j. Matthew Buchanan, editor of the I.P. blog "Promote the progress" to do this and other issues on his site Subcommittee hearings records).
Testimony of Dr. Myhrvvold is insightful, informative and well worth reading. He makes several valid points to counteract the proposed "reforms".
As for the argument that small inventors only a minor role in technical innovation, says that even the biggest companies rarely hold more than 10% of the patents in a given field: "[I] f add them, universities, private individuals and small businesses as a whole have substantially more patents processor Intel or IBM - in fact over the two combined." "Small inventors have more patents of Microsoft's operating system, most patent Cisco networks and more wireless patents to Qualcomm".
Also testifying, says, "critics of the patent system sometimes speak derisively myth of the small inventor, ignoring his contribution." "Well, am here to tell you that small inventors are not only alive and well, but actually contribute inventions rather than large corporations."
Dr. Myhrvold also makes a strong case why the relief by mandate must remain a resource suitable for patent infringement. Noting that "irreparable harm" is not a corresponding element in relief by permanent mandate, Dr. Myhrvold testified that "[T] he Committee print says, in effect, okay take ownership of the owner of the patent as not irreparably harm them." This is equivalent to say okay for an occupant to camp on your lawn to that damage to you isn't "irreparable". "This flies to most property concepts."
As to the claim that there was an explosion of patent claims, Dr. Myhrvold says, "the magnitude of the alleged problem not is confirmed by the statistics." Noting that just over 2% of patent claims presented in the last 5 years were submitted by entities which do not produce products, Dr. Myhrvold testified, "Tales of terror not on an epidemic or the situation that is out of control - is really a very minor phenomenon."
Finally and revealing, Dr. Myhrvold says United States - large companies which produce supposedly real products - often not really producing products at all. Make R & D, arrive with brilliant designs, and then increasingly sending this offshore intellectual property for real production elsewhere. "As is, is becoming increasingly rare for a company that 'makes' products for manufacturing." Instead designed products that are built by the other, often outsourced overseas. "What is the difference between and an inventor to license their patents?" Good question indeed.
I am biased is true that in this debate, but I think that the testimony of Dr. Myhrvold is valid and accurately identifies defects in these calls "reforms". It comes as make someone who has "been there" and "done", I believe that the Senate Subcommittee would be wise views of Dr. Myhrvold credit and give considerable weight.
沒有留言:
張貼留言