The Supreme Court's decision in Alice v CLS Bank invalidated many of the low -
quality software patents favored by patent trolls.
Of course, no bill would be ideal without addressing the elephant in the room: poor
quality software patents.
We were disappointed to see hard - fought patent reform derailed by political dealings, but have seen a Supreme Court ruling in Alice v. CLS Bank used to challenge some of the lowest -
quality software patents.
While we strongly support the Innovation Act, we believe that further reform will be needed to bring the patent system into the 21st century and deal with the fundamental problem of low -
quality software patents.
The flood of these low -
quality software patents is at the root of this problem, and we can not fully address the scourge of patent trolls without addressing those patents.
Ultimately, current reform efforts only target litigation abuse and ignore the more fundamental problem of the flood of low -
quality software patents.
Not exact matches
The AIA made important improvements to the examination process and overall
patent quality, but stakeholders remain concerned about
patents with overly broad claims — particularly in the context of
software.
This is
software — developed, as it happens, by Mayall's brother — that manages the process of downloading
patents from the Internet, automating many tasks, speeding download times, and delivering high
quality images.
The Predictive Discovery technology builds upon the company's large
patent portfolio of machine - learning and classification
software and leadership in helping develop The Sedona Conference guidance on search, statistics and
quality.
Even more is at stake for an American
patent system swamped by millions of low -
quality patents, many of them — like the one belonging to Alice Corp — related to
software.
This could include limiting
patent continuations (the endless do - overs of
patent applications), cutting down on overbroad functional claims (a feature of almost all bad
software patents), and improving the
quality of review.
Finally, today's discussion draft focuses on litigation system, rather than targeting the root cause of the problem: the flood of low -
quality, over-broad
software patents.
One glaring omission: a robust discussion about
patent quality and the problem of vague, overbroad
software patents.
There can be no doubt: we have a problem with low -
quality, abstract
software patents in this country.
It recently held a series of roundtables to discuss the
quality of
software patents and the problem of functional claiming.