Lists Home |
Date Index |
- To: 'John Cowan' <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Subject: RE: [xml-dev] Applying XML to Improve Patent Processes (WAS RE: [ xml-dev] A sta ndard approach to glueing together reusable X ML fragment s in prose?)
- From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <email@example.com>
- Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 14:08:50 -0500
- Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org
I did not know that. Thanks.
Sounds like election reform in
need of public funding. That
convinces me even more that the
policy makers are the right place
to address the issues of IP reform
because given what you say, all the
patent office can do is speed up
their processes and improve their
research into prior art.
From: John Cowan [mailto:email@example.com]
Bullard, Claude L (Len) scripsit:
> My guess is that from their point of view, the filers are the public.
> How could that work any other way? They are there to serve policy,
> not set it. The quarrel may be with the policy makers not the agency
> designated to implement it.
Not so. The USPTO is funded solely by income from patent filings and
searches; I would guess that the bulk of the income comes from the former
source. It is therefore in their interests to allow as many patents as
possible to be filed with as little oversight as possible, and
to make searching as inefficient as possible without making the service
downright useless. Their business plan talks about hiring more examiners
so that they can get patents from "filed" to "in effect" as fast as
absolutely no mention of rejecting any.
I am a member of a civilization. --David Brin