Can I have some feedback on the below article

Hi Guys,
Can I have some feedback on the below article:

Thanks!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/02/25/AR2011022506946.html

Sunday, February 27, 2011 Washington Post

Why the patent process should be overhauled

MORE THAN 60 years have passed since a major overhaul of the U.S. patent system has taken place. And it shows.

The U.S. patent system lags woefully. One example: Patents in the United States are given to those "first to invent." This approach is out of step with the rest of the world's "first to file" approach and is highly inefficient. It invites people to come out of the woodwork years after a product has been on the market to claim credit and demand royalties.

The secretive, lengthy U.S. process also too often allows patents for products that are neither novel nor innovative. It leaves manufacturers vulnerable to infringement lawsuits and damage awards long after their products have gone to market.

The Senate is poised to take up a bill on Monday that would eliminate these defects and bring the U.S. system into the 21st century.

The Patent Reform Act, introduced by Sens. Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.) and Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah), would recognize the "first inventor to file" standard, creating a bright line - the date on which a patent application was filed - and bringing certainty to the process. Yet the bill is not inflexible and wisely keeps in place protections for academics who share their ideas with outside colleagues or preview them in public seminars.

The bill also would increase protections for those with legitimate gripes. Third parties, currently shut out of the process, would be given clear rules and time limits to challenge patents that have not yet been approved. They'd also have a chance to lodge objections after a patent has been granted; the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) would resolve these disputes. This safety valve should reduce the litigation costs associated with court challenges.

The PTO has long been overwhelmed and underfunded. The bill would allow the agency to set the amount it charges for filings while providing discounts to solo inventors and small companies. An amendment likely to be introduced by Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) would allow the agency to keep all of its fees, thereby ensuring it the resources it needs to carry out the bill's mandates.

President Obama made much of "winning the future" in his State of the Union address. A patent system that protects innovators and encourages real breakthroughs would help achieve that goal.

Although there are many issues in this new legislation - there are basic issues that support the inventor. Overall it's a good thing for inventors and a good thing to bring the US system in line with the rest of the world.

Personally I prefer the "first to invent" , this is to protect the solo Inventor from people who claim to have Invented the Invention first, (There are situations were the original Inventor ends up with nothing, it happens), here is a link about this issue below, its makes for a good debate!

The grace period is also a feature that I like, this gives an inventor a chance to test the market before, lodging Patents, I know its not ideal, but its an option for Inventors, I believe if other people also lodge within the grace period, then they can also get the same patents rights, interested in comments on this also.

http://www.iusmentis.com/patents/uspto-epodiff/

more below:

First-to-Invent
For hundreds of years, patents were given to the first person to invent something new. Even when another person copied the idea and showed up to the patent office first to claim it, the true inventor was given priority, and the patent. Patents were available exclusively to the inventor – and specifically not made available to non-inventors.
While contests over inventorship priority are infrequent, it remains the law of the land that the first-to-invent is the only one entitled a patent.

http://www.integrityip.com/GGL/Patent/First-To-Invent.aspx

When I Assign my Patent rights to Manufactures, one major point in the contract (brokerage and Development Agreement) is that I can prove Inventor ship, that I am the real Inventor.

Example Below:

http://www.freepatentsonline.com/7739806.pdf

Also I have seen what can happen with CO Inventors in a Patent, both have the same rights and can License, I feel that needs to be reviewed also, there will never be a perfect Patent system, but improvements would be good.

http://www.inventions.org/resources/advisory/first.html

http://blog.brainstormpatents.com/2009/10/01/first-to-file-first-to-invent-does-it-matter/

Comments from the above link

I believe that the most important reason for keeping the first to invent system is because this system protects the “little” inventor. Oftentimes, the little inventor may not have the necessary funds to file a patent. Larger companies will always be able to file a patent, thus, eliminating the rights of the little inventor. Similarly, there will be little incentive for a person to invest large amounts of their time and money into developing an idea when it is very likely that someone may beat them to the patent office.

I agree Derek. This is a revenue machine for the government. It also tilts the table towards the wealthy corps. Im going to grab my camping gear. Its time to occupy the PTO!