

Time to fix patents - martincmartin
http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21660522-ideas-fuel-economy-todays-patent-systems-are-rotten-way-rewarding-them-time-fix

======
drallison
For HN readers, the premise is certainly not new. The failures of our IP
protection system (patents and copyrights) are continually exposed in the
literature and in the courtroom.

What we don't see is any movement towards substantive change. The latest
revision, the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act
([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leahy-
Smith_America_Invents_Ac...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leahy-
Smith_America_Invents_Act)), made significant changes at one level (e.g.,
first-to-file replaced first-to-invent) but did not address any of the
fundamental issues. For example, just what constitutes a patentable invention
remains cloudy. See, for example,
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alice_Corp._v._CLS_Bank_Int%27...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alice_Corp._v._CLS_Bank_Int%27l)

Patents in the US are constitutionally mandated. Article I, Section 8, Clause
8, of the United States Constitution grants Congress the power "To promote the
progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors
and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and
discoveries." These days it is not clear that the patent law, as written and
practiced, actually fulfills the constitutional mandates and promotes the
"progress of science and the useful arts".

For amusement, Google "stupid patents" or "silly patents" and follow the
links.

------
bainsfather
I don't think this says much that is new to hn readers, but it is
interesting/significant that The Economist has it as a lead article, and on
its front page.

