Comments on: It’s the economy, stupid: Why Congress is getting vocal about patent disputes

By: Lemond

Lemond — Thu, 30 Aug 2012 16:43:41 +0000

They might as well have submitted their concerns on Intel letterhead. I hope the ITC will see as plainly as I that all those in favor of Intel host a lot in Intels interests in their states

By: pkj

pkj — Thu, 30 Aug 2012 01:59:06 +0000

No, its not “the economy”, Derrick. Its the lobbyists who are legally bribing politicians to take their positions. That is the root of most of America’s troubles.

By: jf

jf — Thu, 30 Aug 2012 00:18:44 +0000

x2y licences its technology to samsung and other companies its not like this is some fly by nite company looking to cash in big time. x2y has basically stopped electronic interference in circuitry someting that was said could never be done, the great senators need to do there homework on what x2y`s technology does, intel has egg on its face big time and are now cornered, and as far as going to steal there technology and ask the senators to step in is just plain wrong , it not the first time intel has ripped someone off Amd was awarded a large some for intel`s patent infringement, Intel needs to do the right thing and pay X2Y for there technology , you can`t steal from others an expect to get away with it just because your rich and powerful like intel idf the shoe was on the other foot you better believe intel would be the first to stomp on you for taking it. and then making billions in profit from it, just my two cents

By: DM

DM — Wed, 29 Aug 2012 19:17:49 +0000

The “public good” argument is entirely specious. Imports of Intel chip based products would not be interrupted if Intel simply licensed the patented technology. Public good would be preserved by protecting the intellectual property of small companies from large corps and politicians.

By: Yagya Sen

Yagya Sen — Wed, 29 Aug 2012 19:14:41 +0000

I guess patent office has not been decorated for many many years and working on same old model. I agree that patents have different level including a proof of design and final working product. Definition of a patent requests need to be more subtle than ever because of many patent requests are very close to each other especially software patents that missing the minute detail can cause issue/verdict like what we just witnessed between Apple and Samsung. I am not even sure that in case of software patents, patent office have many technology experts who can define the patent character. Congressmen are just doing their job both in terms of Politics ( Their statement will be referred in future) and being lobbyist for companies who support them in elections and they can think that doing so is also in favor of American people and country as a whole (that is a good thing).

By: Danox

Danox — Wed, 29 Aug 2012 17:54:37 +0000

The biggest problem is having a Congress that actually cares about people instead of lobbyists (Companies.) Doing what is right for the Taxpayer, Ratepayer in general will never please or satisfy companies. The patent office at present just can’t seem to say no, however something should be done so that if a company doesn’t have a finished implementation or product (fully working for sale to the public) no patent will be granted, and the patent office should be able to stand behind that decision without outside influence.

By: John B.

John B. — Tue, 28 Aug 2012 21:54:15 +0000

You know something Karen? I’ve been very vocal on this issue. I have.begun to lose hope. I feel the patent system is terribly broken. Technology has progressed so fast, that I don’t think the offices can keep up on applications for IPs. I think that they have basically rested any initiative in following up on whether others hold IPs or not OR what is considered patentable or not. I’m not claiming that this is what they do but, it almost appears they just trust the companies on good faith that they have done their own proper research before filing, then grant them and hope that they stick. We must add in the lawyers. When attorneys are involved as heavily as they are in patents, I don’t think change will happen.

John B.

By: Karen Kazaryan

Karen Kazaryan — Tue, 28 Aug 2012 20:43:07 +0000

How about real patent reform?