
EFF Asks Supreme Court to Expand Fee Shifting in Patent Cases - codegeek
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/12/eff-asks-supreme-court-expand-fee-shifting-patent-cases
======
brownbat
I'm all for patent reform, but this seems like the smallest possible reform.

When deciding whether to take on the massive time and cost of patent
litigation, the prospect of repaid expenses some day in the distant future
isn't going to make a lot of business owners swoon, especially considering the
risk of losing for stupid reasons, or winning against some insolvent shell
company.

And more "loser pays" rules in places like Marshall, TX might even make things
worse.

I wouldn't be so critical if I didn't think there were great reform ideas out
there. On EFF's legislative solutions page,[1] heightened pleading, expanded
post-grant review, and functional claiming would each offer a lot of impact.

Mostly expanded post-grant review... I'd push it beyond even what EFF
describes. The public should be able to point out when the patent office
granted another patent that is vague, non-novel, or obvious and get patents
revoked. If your patents are constantly revoked, there should be consequences.
Maybe abuse of process, maybe anyone who signed a contract with you to license
those patents has some kind of claim, maybe just to get their money back with
interest...

[1] [https://www.eff.org/issues/legislative-solutions-patent-
refo...](https://www.eff.org/issues/legislative-solutions-patent-reform)

