Difference between revisions of "Raising examination standards"
m (moved Raising examination standards to Raising examination standards won't fix much: won't fix much) |
(→Related pages on {{SITENAME}}: * RSA patent) |
||
Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
* [[Patent standards here are higher than in the USA]] - a myth for most countries | * [[Patent standards here are higher than in the USA]] - a myth for most countries | ||
* [[Patent review by the public]] | * [[Patent review by the public]] | ||
+ | * [[RSA patent]] | ||
* (USA) [[The Patent Reform Act]] | * (USA) [[The Patent Reform Act]] | ||
Revision as of 12:20, 4 August 2010
What this entry documents is not a solution.
This practice may be ineffective or useless in the long term.
ESP's position is that abolition of software patents is the only solution.
When people talk about patent reform, they are usually referring to proposals to raise examination standards by making the criteria stricter or tougher, and increasing the resources available to patent examiners.
The result would be to reduce the number of software patents granted. This would be helpful, but it wouldn't solve the problem. It only takes one software patent to destroy a small business or ruin an interoperability standard.
When encouraging the raising of patent examination standards, it's very important that your work is not misunderstood as showing support for "high quality" software patents. Always phrase your support like: "Raising the standards is a step in the right direction, but even 'high quality' software patents are harmful to society. The right thing to do is get rid of software patents entirely".
Related pages on ESP Wiki
- Duds and non-solutions
- Quality of software patents is particularly bad
- Patent standards here are higher than in the USA - a myth for most countries
- Patent review by the public
- RSA patent
- (USA) The Patent Reform Act
External links
- gnu.org: Patent Reform Is Not Enough