FTC Patent Reform Workshops in Feb/Mar 2005
Seth Johnson <[email protected]> Mon, 06 Dec 2004 06:43:31 -0500
| Newsgroups | gmane.org.dmca-activists,gmane.org.aful.patents |
|---|---|
| Organization | Real Measures |
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
From: > http://www.ftc.gov/speeches/majoras/041118abafallforum.pdf 1. Patent Reform Workshops Along with the National Academy of Sciences (ÂNASÂ) and the American Intellectual Property Law Association (ÂAIPLAÂ), the FTC will co-sponsor four town meetings on patent reform in 2005. Since the FTC issued its report on competition and patent law in October 2003, there have been three noteworthy developments relating to it. 14 First, the NAS issued a report advocating several patent reforms similar to those recommended by the FTC, as well as additional patent reforms. 15 Second, patent law organizations such as the AIPLA have issued reports reacting favorably to several of the FTCÂs proposed reforms. 16 And finally, Congressmen Boucher and Berman introduced a bill, H.R. 5299, that would implement versions of two of the proposed reforms  a new post-grant opposition system and certain limitations on liability for willful infringement  recommended by the FTC, NAS, and AIPLA. We believe it likely that Congress will discuss patent reform in the next session. To help lay the groundwork for this discussion, we have structured our patent reform workshops as town meetings. To encourage broad participation from businesses, independent inventors, patent practitioners, and others, we will hold the town meetings in three different locations  San Jose, Chicago, and Boston  in February and March, 2005. We will conclude with a program in Washington, D.C., in June. We will shortly announce details on the FTC's website, and registration for the town meetings will be available at the AIPLA website. -- DRM is Theft! We are the Stakeholders! New Yorkers for Fair Use http://www.nyfairuse.org [CC] Counter-copyright: http://realmeasures.dyndns.org/cc I reserve no rights restricting copying, modification or distribution of this incidentally recorded communication. Original authorship should be attributed reasonably, but only so far as such an expectation might hold for usual practice in ordinary social discourse to which one holds no claim of exclusive rights.