Crowdfunding Backer Patented My Project
patentpandas.org
patentpandas.org
Would it be feasible to build an "unpatented" database where people could submit the inventions they don't want patented and have the USPTO look at it in their research?
Maybe a patent version of what copyleft is to copyright?
You could also file a patent and let it lapse after the PgPub publishes, so for the cost of the basic filing fee you can put whatever you want into the official US Patent database. For a micro entity, that's only $75.
http://news.mit.edu/2018/mit-prior-art-archive-aims-improve-...
The real stinker in this whole story is how Jill Mackay had the balls to try to sell the patent back to Jie for $5MM. Totally shameful and by a fellow "artist" no less.
A lot of these come back to the problem of defining a patent: There is no way to determine, in a patent office, in the real world, at scale... if patents are actually novel and/or trivial.
It's possible to disprove a novelty claim in some cases (like this one), but that's it.
We need major reform, globally. The pharmaceutical/medical patent system needs to be separate to the software patent system, for example.
This case is really a great example. Patents enables intellectual theft, it doesn't prevent it.
So, no the difficulty in proving intent is not the reason.
Another solution could be to fix/use the asymmetry of being granted a patent and invalidating a patent. Right now it seems getting a patent is much easier than invalidating it. There have been steps to sort this, e.g. inter partes review (IPR). I'd like it to reversed, i.e. invalidating should be much easier than being granted a patent.
The worst examples of bad software patents are largely behind us now, as they were a product of an era of rapid technological change and a dearth of qualified examiners in the mid to late 1990s and early 2000s. Many of those have been defeated in litigation or are starting to fall out of their 20 year windows of exclusivity.
And while this case may be frustrating for us to read, do keep in mind the ground truth of what has transpired. A person has completed a bureaucratic process with a government entity and received a piece of paper. Nobody has been sued by this patent (that we know of from this blog post) and the patent owner has not profited a dime (again, as we know of from the blog post. At this stage it seems premature to get all up in arms about it.
Thank you to the author Jie Qi (MIT)
What can be done on individual level, at the engineering level, as well as voters in US or European Union, to make sure that the economic theft of this type does not thrive ?
(and I am sure there are many 'Jill MacKay' characters in other countries, not just US)
The current patent system in US at least -- had been converted into a form of legalized racketeering.
With its own ecosystem of 'enforcers', 'masterminds', 'spies on the ground', etc.
Also just as in protection from racketeers it pays to have 'wealthy' and 'powerful' backers for your business (with whom you must share a portion of your equity... ).
One of the key takeaways from this is that even if you don't want to exclude other people from using and building on your invention, you should still patent it. It's much cheaper to file the patent--you don't even need to hire a lawyer to do it--than it is to fight off someone else.
But I also agree with the other comments here that if patent examiners need to do a more through search for prior art than just examining other existing patents, especially in domains where there are open-source communities. That would involve a modest increase in cost to the government, much or all of which could be covered by increasing the patent filing fees, and be a huge economic benefit for companies large and small that get harassed by dubious patents.
Now, the author is not exactly correct in that the IPR is the only route forward to invalidate a patent. Some other options include ex partes reexam and protest, which may have the potential to be a lower-cost option.
In any event, having pertinent (according to the author) prior art cited in an IDS in the file wrapper could neuter a patent anyways, as any attempt to enforce or transfer it would be severely hampered by its presence. Even any attorney who would take a case to enforce it could potentially have ethics issues in taking the case if they believed the cited art to be invalidating. And no one would buy a patent with such a cloud over it, until all cited art is addressed in a contentious proceeding or in examination it's probably not going to be sold.
> What really twisted me inside was to see her emphasize how her stickers are “made in the USA.” Here’s the irony of the situation: Chinese American immigrant student (that’s me!) from MIT goes to Shenzhen, China to create an educational toolkit. But the output of such work is patented by an American businesswoman from Colorado who promotes the “USA” origin of the work.
https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/dc954b_8c3843e07bea451a8723ab...
This document suggests an overall impressive persona. So why would she do something so evil as this?
> Jill MacKay is an accomplished designer, author and artist. Her name is synonymous with innovation and she is known for her genuine enthusiasm, love of nature and boundless spirit. Combined with over thirty years of creative work experience, Jill is one of the most skilled and sought after designers in the creative industries today. Jill licenses her product lines to national chains, manufacturers and television retailers. Jill is perhaps best known for having been the jewelry designer for the daytime drama The Guiding Light, and for her work on Paramount Studio’s Star Trek: The Next Generation. She truly believes in the power of the arts to change lives, help solve social issues, heal hearts and build communities. Jill is also known as an art in education (AIE) specialist and for helping to develop the concept of Community Artist through her work with national arts organizations.
Now seriously. Sew them. Hunt them down legally and shame them online for the rest of their life.