ESP Wiki is looking for moderators and active contributors!

Difference between revisions of "Raising examination standards"
(==Standards example: MPEG== MPEG LA represents a pool of over 1,000 patents which it claims are essential for an implementation of the H.264 video format.<ref>http://lwn.net/Articles/371751/</a>)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
{{navbox}}{{dud}}
 
{{navbox}}{{dud}}
−
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.
+
Raising examination standards would reduce the total number of [[software patents]] granted, but given that most patent problems involve multiple patents, and given that one patent is enough to block development, a reduction would not solve many problems.
  
−
The result would be to reduce the number of [[software patents]] granted.  For the problem of [[patent trolls]],
+
==Standards example: MPEG==
  
−
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.
+
[[MPEG LA]] represents a pool of over 1,000 patents which it claims are essential for an implementation of the H.264 video format.<ref>http://lwn.net/Articles/371751/</a> Many of these are duplicates (one for each country), so maybe there are 100 patents (each with around 20 claims).
 +
 
 +
If these numbers are reduced by 10%, 50%, or even 95%, there will be no change to the fact that implementing that format requires permission from MPEG LA.
 +
 
 +
==Slight benefit==
 +
 
 +
The result would be to reduce the ''number'' of [[software patents]] granted.  This should reduce the problems caused by [[patent trolls]].
  
 
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''".
 
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''".
Line 21: Line 27:
 
* [http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/patent-reform-is-not-enough.html Patent Reform Is Not Enough], '''gnu.org'''
 
* [http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/patent-reform-is-not-enough.html Patent Reform Is Not Enough], '''gnu.org'''
 
* [http://www.ipeg.eu/blog/?p=1742 KSR, patent obviousness and USPTO practice], 29 Sept 2010, '''ipeg''' - USPTO is ''lowering'' it's standards regarding obviousness
 
* [http://www.ipeg.eu/blog/?p=1742 KSR, patent obviousness and USPTO practice], 29 Sept 2010, '''ipeg''' - USPTO is ''lowering'' it's standards regarding obviousness
 +
 +
==References==
 +
{{reflist}}
  
  

Revision as of 11:54, 5 November 2010

Red alert.png 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.


Raising examination standards would reduce the total number of software patents granted, but given that most patent problems involve multiple patents, and given that one patent is enough to block development, a reduction would not solve many problems.

Standards example: MPEG

MPEG LA represents a pool of over 1,000 patents which it claims are essential for an implementation of the H.264 video format.<ref>http://lwn.net/Articles/371751/</a> Many of these are duplicates (one for each country), so maybe there are 100 patents (each with around 20 claims).

If these numbers are reduced by 10%, 50%, or even 95%, there will be no change to the fact that implementing that format requires permission from MPEG LA.

Slight benefit

The result would be to reduce the number of software patents granted. This should reduce the problems caused by patent trolls.

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

External links

References

Retrieved from "https://wiki.endsoftwarepatents.org/w/index.php?title=Raising_examination_standards&oldid=20377"