38
edits
Legal:Prior Art: Difference between revisions
→Challenges and Criticisms
| Line 171: | Line 171: | ||
* Richard Stallman, in [http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/trivial-patent.html Anatomy of a Trivial Patent], writes, "What's more, the courts are reluctant to overrule the Patent Office, so there is a better chance of getting a patent overturned if you can show a court prior art that the Patent Office did not consider. If the courts are willing to entertain a higher standard in judging unobviousness, it helps to save the prior art for them. Thus, the proposals to "make the system work better" by providing the Patent Office with a better database of prior art could instead make things worse." | * Richard Stallman, in [http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/trivial-patent.html Anatomy of a Trivial Patent], writes, "What's more, the courts are reluctant to overrule the Patent Office, so there is a better chance of getting a patent overturned if you can show a court prior art that the Patent Office did not consider. If the courts are willing to entertain a higher standard in judging unobviousness, it helps to save the prior art for them. Thus, the proposals to "make the system work better" by providing the Patent Office with a better database of prior art could instead make things worse." | ||
* By helping applicants write claims to avoid prior art, a prior art database would reduce the average cost of a valid patent. Since most new patents are not licensed for free software use, a prior art database could increase the total patent threat to free software. | * By helping applicants write claims to avoid prior art, a prior art database would reduce the average cost of a valid patent. Since most new patents are not licensed for free software use, a prior art database could increase the total patent threat to free software. | ||
* If prior art databases actually hurt patent trolls, patent trolls would have found a reason to complain about them. | |||
= Project Team = | = Project Team = | ||