Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
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. len -----Original Message----- From: John Cowan [mailto:jcowan@r...] 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 (secondarily() 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 possible: absolutely no mention of rejecting any. -- John Cowan jcowan@r... I am a member of a civilization. --David Brin
|
