[FoRK] Mildly positive patent legislation...

Chris Olds colds at dydax.com
Mon Mar 15 20:09:19 PST 2004

On Mon, 15 Mar 2004, jbone at place.org wrote:
> This just flowed past /.
> At least if we can't fundamentally fix the system --- we can perhaps 
> make it work a bit better and ditch the bogus patents.

I continue to be amazed at the late '90s filing dates for techniques that
I've been using for years.  The PTO, especially wrt computer software, is
just coming into the '90s (the 1990's, thankfully - it really *could* be

> Legislation advances to speed patents
> By David Lammers, EE Times
> March 15, 2004 (10:20 a.m. EST)
> URL: http://www.eetimes.com/story/OEG20040315S0013
> But shorter isn't always better, in the view of Paul Nixon, CEO of 
> Intrinsity Inc. (Austin). Intrinsity's lobby
> "It can take several years to get a patent, but sometimes that can work 
> to our favor," Nixon said. "In our early years we were in a hurry to 
> secure key patents, because that was an important credibility factor 
> for Intrinsity. But remember that for the 17 years [that a patent is in 
> force], the clock starts ticking from the date of issue. Sometimes you 
> want patents to issue when the chip starts to ship."

I hope this guy's not handling their IP strategy.  Since '95 the rule has
been 20 years from first filing, not 17 years from issue.  This, plus (to
a smaller extent) publication of applications before a patent issues, will
help eliminate the problem of 'submarine' patents that are pending for


More information about the FoRK mailing list