[Patents] The Patent King

[erikjosefsson@usa.net (erik josefsson)]

Dear members of the list,

I apologize for the undigested article "The Patent King" I dumped on all =
of
you with my latest posting. I was upset, sorry.

"The Patent King" opened my eyes to how the (US) patent system is unable =
to
handle abuse of the system.

I feel that a lot of pro-swpat arguments on this list are based on reason=
able
claims to have protection, return of investments, stimulate invention etc=
=2E But
in spite of all of these "good" claims, they seem to miss a fundamental p=
oint.
Abuse.

In politics Karl Popper says the most important question is: "How can we =
so
organize political institutions that bad or incompetent rulers can be
prevented from doing too much damage?"
  =

Which here on the list would be equivalent to: "How can we so organize a
protection system for software that Patent Kings can be prevented from do=
ing
too much damage?"

kind regards

//Erik Josefsson


quotes from the article:
http://www.fortune.com/indexw.jhtml?channel=3Dartcol.jhtml&doc_id=3D20221=
6

Lemelson spent his life thinking up patents--and then filing lawsuits to
enforce them

In truth, his most lucrative patents were the product of a masterful
exploitation of the patent system, and they created a huge legal web that=
 to
this day ensnares corporations. =


Even one of Lemelson's former attorneys, Arthur Lieberman, questions whet=
her
Lemelson was an inventor in the layman's sense of the word. Rather, he sa=
ys,
Lemelson would figure out where an industry was headed--and then place a
patent claim directly in its path. "In many cases, Lemelson didn't patent=

inventions," says Lieberman. "He invented patents." =


But if they don't, the $1.5 billion collected so far by Lemelson will be =
just
a down payment on a much larger tab--payment not for the creation of new =
ideas
but for what can only be called an intellectual land grab. =


"He would look at the magazines and determine the direction of industry,"=

shrugs ex-Lemelson attorney Lieberman. In this view, Lemelson wasn't
attempting to create real products. He was just using his knowledge to ge=
t the
first chit in at the Patent Office and lay the groundwork for a future cl=
aim.


Today a serious patent practitioner will craft an application in such a w=
ay
that it not only describes a particular invention but also potentially co=
vers
other inventions. =


Lemelson would grind down the examiners by submitting "jumbo" application=
s
that stretched to more than 100 pages. "There's no way that you could rea=
d an
entire application in the case of the jumbo applications," says Miller. N=
ot
only were they huge, they could be incredibly vague; some patent examiner=
s
began referring to Lemelson as "Black Box Jerry" because of his tendency =
to
offer sweeping notions with very little technical detail. =


If we overwhelm them with our patents, they should comply and take a lice=
nse."


If Hosier made Lemelson tremendously wealthy--and he did--the reverse is =
also
true. When he first took on Lemelson as a client in the late 1980s, Hosie=
r was
one of the few patent lawyers willing to work on contingency. Since then =
he
has generated $1.5 billion in licensing fees--and has reportedly taken a =
third
for himself. (Hosier declines to comment on his fee.)

And yet for all the talk about the iron-clad nature of his patents--and t=
he
money they've generated--a crucial question has been obscured: Did Jerome=

Lemelson ever actually invent the products that generated such riches?



____________________________________________________________________
Get free email and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=3D=
1