IPR Process Saves 80 Companies from Paying for a Sports-Motion Patent

[DiabloD3]

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2018/02/ipr-process-saves-80-companies-paying-sports-motion-patent

[jimrandomh]

Why is the patent office approving so many patents on non-novel things? While we don't get as much visibility into what they're rejecting, it seems like they're a rubber-stamp factory and are offloading their job onto the courts.

[josaka → jimrandomh]

Not to suggest that they're perfect, but I wouldn't say they're a rubber stamp. Only 1/5 patent apps is allowed in some art units: https://blog.juristat.com/2017/10/4/the-art-units-with-the-h...

[IntronExon → jimrandomh]

From another post on the fp, the answer might be that their funding depends on fees. It may be a particularly apt example of getting what we pay for.

[jccooper]

Is anyone doing a dedicated or distributed prior art location project? "Preissuance Third Party Submission" is a much easier way to dispose of bad patents, done during the application stage, but it requires someone to notice first. Seems like it would be a public good to challenge essentially all patent applications.

[walterbell → jccooper]

You mean an open version of https://priorart.ip.com? It has even been difficult to have an open, pubic database of US law.

If an open database existed, ML/AI and blockchain could reduce the burden of finding affected parties to help challenge patent applications.