Patent, Trademark & Copyright insanity in the U.S. : 10-28-03 FTC writes report about failings of the Patent Office

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,889
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
10-28-2003 FTC Issues Report on How to Promote Innovation Through Balancing Competition with Patent Law and Policy

Although questionable patents can harm competition and innovation, valid patents work well with competition to promote innovation. This Report analyzes and makes recommendations for the patent system to maintain the proper balance with competition,? said Timothy J. Muris, FTC Chairman.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It's rare to see one Govt Agency comment negatively on another, glad to see the FTC not afraid to talk about the failings of the Patent Office.



Microsoft is on a roll lately :confused: ;

10-15-2003 Microsoft Patents Your Local Weather Report

Patent 6,632,248Posted by timothy on Wednesday October 15, @10:35AM
from the ask-your-local-ueber-monkeys dept.
theodp writes "After a seven year wait, Microsoft was granted a patent Tuesday for the Customization of network documents by accessing customization information on a server computer using unique user identifiers, patent lawyer-speak for using preferences stored on a server for such purposes as "displaying stock quotes for the companies in which the user is interested, and displaying the user's local weather report.""
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A while back I made a website from existing html tools and website to display local weather without having to download a client program or anything. Based on the nut jobs at the Patent Office my existing use of prior art and common Internet Technology may now belong and owned by Microsoft. This insanity has to stop. Absolute fvcking idiots work at the Patent Office!

Dave's Gainesville Georgia Automatic Weather Update page

10-7-2003 Patenting the Obvious - Microsoft gets Patent for Instant Messaging

Microsoft continues the industry trend of trying to patent technology that's been commonly used for nearly three decades. They've filed for a patent on a simple IM programming concept; the "so-and-so is typing a message" monitoring text that appears on the majority of IM clients. The technology's formal name is "System and method for activity monitoring and reporting in a computer network"; the application was approved today by the USPTO.


9-24-2003 Linus Torvalds comments: "The experiences from the USA demonstrate that software patents don't benefit anyone but perhaps the patent lawyers. They will just weaken the market and increase spending on patents and litigation, at the expense of technological innovation and research.


9-20-2003 Owner of Dewey Decimal System Sues New York's Library Hotel

Melvil Dewey created his system - used in 95 percent of all public and K-12 school libraries - in 1873, but it is continually updated, with numbers assigned to more than 100,000 new works each year.

In the lawsuit filed last week, lawyers for the Online Computer Library Center said the organization acquired the rights to the system in 1988 when it bought Forest Press, which published Dewey Decimal updates. The center charges libraries that use the system at least $500 per year.

The complaint filed in U.S. District Court in Columbus seeks triple the hotel's profits since its opening or triple the organization's damages, whichever is greater, from the hotel's owner.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Any Librarians in here? I didn't know Library's were paying $500 a year just for their filing system that dates back to 1873.


============================================================

Update 10 years later

1-4-2013

http://yro.slashdot.org/story/13/01...utm_source=rss1.0mainlinkanon&utm_medium=feed

USPTO Asks For Input On Software Patents



"The patent office is reviewing its policy on software patents and is asking for feedback.


Groklaw reports that the USPTO will be hosting a pair of roundtable sessions in February, during which the public will have the ability to attend and put forth their viewpoints. From the article: 'It's obvious the USPTO realizes there is serious unhappiness among software developers, and they'd like to improve things.


Software developers are the folks most immediately and directly affected by the software patents the USPTO issues, and it's getting to the point that no one can code anything without potentially getting sued.


If you can make it to Silicon Valley on February 12 or New York City on February 27, go and make your voice heard."
 
Last edited:

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
73,399
6,398
126
Man it would be better to use talking books. You could just yell out the book name and it would answer where it is.
 

Warin

Senior member
Sep 6, 2001
270
0
0
What a load of hooey. this is obviously a hotel, not a library!

IF anything, they should be entitled to whatever ($500?) they receive from a library as compensation, from the hotel yearly.

Anyone know if the Library of Congress numbering system is encumbered by the same sort of inane problems? After all, why not give your rooms numbers and letters? I know I'd want to stay in room HQ 447 .D59 1987

:D :D :D
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,889
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
Linus Torvalds and Alan Cox: Please say no for software patents

---

Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 12:18:49 +0300
From: Kai Puolamaki <kai.puolamaki@effi.org>
To: declan@well.com
Subject: Linus Torvalds and Alan Cox: Please say no for software patents
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i
X-PGP-Key: http://www.iki.fi/kaip/pubkey.asc


Please find the attached press release for consideration to
Politechbot.

Open letter by Linus Torvalds and Alan Cox to the European parliament:
http://www.effi.org/patentit/patents_torvalds_cox.html

Best regards,
Kai Puolam&auml;ki
EFFI ry

* * *

This document:
http://www.effi.org/julkaisut/tiedotteet/pressrelease-2003-09-22.html


Helsinki 22 September 2003
Press release
For immediate release
Electronic Frontier Finland - EFFI ry


Linus Torvalds and Alan Cox: Please say no for software patents

Linus Torvalds and Alan Cox ask for strict limitations to software
patents in their letter to the members of the European Parliament. The
vote on the Directive will be on Wednesday and it is expected to be a
very close one.

Linus Torvalds comments: "The experiences from the USA demonstrate
that software patents don't benefit anyone but perhaps the patent
lawyers. They will just weaken the market and increase spending on
patents and litigation, at the expense of technological innovation and
research. He continues: "We hope that the members of European
Parliament see these negative sides and don't push the same chaos to
the old continent."

Alan Cox notes: "Currently, the companies are moving programming jobs
offshore. The huge move away from the USA is not entirely driven by
pricing but also by patent litigation and risk. Companies create a US
holding company for the intellectual property rights which licenses it
to a non US body to write the software overseas and import it, so as
to reduce risk." He stresses: "Adopting the same kind of patents in
the EU will drive thousands of EU programming jobs overseas, too."

The Open Letter also strongly argues for open standards. Linus
Torvalds explains: "Without open standards it is not really possible
to development open systems. And in the end, without open systems the
society won't remain open for its citizens."

In their letter, Torvalds and Cox set three requests for the
Directive. Firstly, it should clarify limits of patentability so that
computer programs and business methods really cannot be patented as
such. Secondly, the Directive should make sure that patents cannot be
abused to avoid technical competition by preventing interoperability
of competing software. Finally, the patents should not be allowed to
be used to prevent publication of information.

Electronic Frontier Finland ry (EFFI) has coordinated the campaign
against software patents in Finland. EFFI is very pleased of the
position taken by Linus Torvalds and Alan Cox. EFFI chairman Mikko
V&auml;lim&auml;ki comments: "We hope that all members of the European
Parliament now understand the real harm caused by the software
patents."


More information:

Open letter in English:
http://www.effi.org/patentit/patents_torvalds_cox.html

Open letter in Finnish:
http://www.effi.org/patentit/patents_torvalds_cox_fi.html

Open letter in Swedish:
http://www.effi.org/patentit/patents_torvalds_cox_sv.txt

Finnish version of this press release [expanded Finnish coverage]:
http://www.effi.org/julkaisut/tiedotteet/lehdistotiedote-2003-09-22.html


Linus Torvalds
torvalds@osdl.org

Alan Cox
alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk

Mikko V&auml;lim&auml;ki
Chairman, Electronic Frontier Finland ry
mikko.valimaki@effi.org
+358 50 598 0498


Linus Torvalds is the originator and main developer of the Linux
operating system. Alan Cox has been one of the major developers of
Linux for a long time.

Electronic Frontier Finland - EFFI ry was founded in 2001 to defend
active users and citizens of the Finnish society in the electronic
frontier. EFFI influences legislative proposals concerning e.g.
personal privacy, software patents, freedom of speech and fair use in
copyright law. We make statements, press releases and participate
actively in actual public policy and legal discussions. EFFI has been
featured in the national media including TV, radio and leading
newspapers. EFFI also works in close cooperation with organizations
sharing the same goals and values in the Europe, United States and
elsewhere. EFFI is a founding member of the European Digital Rights
and a member of Global Internet Liberty Campaign. More information
from EFFI's home pages: http://www.effi.org/
_______________________________________________
Politech mailing list
Archived at http://www.politechbot.com/
Moderated by Declan McCullagh (http://www.mccullagh.org/)
 

XZeroII

Lifer
Jun 30, 2001
12,572
0
0
Our patent system needs revising, but eliminating them alltogether would be foolish. Torvalds is starting to look pretty bad in my view. Despite the fact that I like MS and Windows, while not liking Linux, I still respected him for what he did and such. Now I'm not so sure he deserves that respect...
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,889
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: XZeroII
Our patent system needs revising, but eliminating them alltogether would be foolish. Torvalds is starting to look pretty bad in my view. Despite the fact that I like MS and Windows, while not liking Linux, I still respected him for what he did and such. Now I'm not so sure he deserves that respect...

"In their letter, Torvalds and Cox set three requests for the Directive. Firstly, it should clarify limits of patentability so that computer programs and business methods really cannot be patented as such. Secondly, the Directive should make sure that patents cannot be abused to avoid technical competition by preventing interoperability of competing software. Finally, the patents should not be allowed to be used to prevent publication of information."

He didn't say he was 100% Anti-Patents.


 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,889
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
This is hysterical but unfortunately so true.
------------------------------------------------------

"a computer-implemented invention must be susceptible to industrial applications, be new, and involve an inventive step.

Moreover I have added a requirement for a technical contribution in order to ensure that the mere use of a computer does not lead to a patent being granted."
----------------------------------------------------

See as background:
http://swpat.ffii.org/players/amccarthy/index.en.html

And:
http://politechbot.com/pipermail/politech/2003-September/000003.html

---

Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 10:34:15 +0200 (CEST)
From: Lukasz Luzar <lluzar@tigeraudits.com>
To: Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com>
Subject: Response to your correspondence regarding the draft EU directive on
patentability of computer-implemented inventions. (fwd)


I have received the following response from Arlene McCarthy MEP regarding
my concerns about the EU software patents.

--
Lukasz Luzar
http://Developers.of.PL/
Crede quod habes, et habes

[[ http://galeria.luzar.pl/ ]]


---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 10:59:40 +0100 (BST)
From: Arlene McCarthy
To: lluzar@tigeraudits.com
Subject: Response to your correspondence regarding the draft EU directive
on patentability of computer-implemented inventions.


Dear Lukasz Luzar,



Thank you for your correspondence concerning the draft directive on the
patentability of computer-implemented inventions.



The European Parliament's Legal Affairs Committee has voted on my report on
the directive and there will be continuing debate and further democratic
scrutiny before the directive becomes law.



At this early stage of legislative process, it is nonetheless important to
establish the facts about what the draft EU directive and what I, as the
Parliament's rapporteur, are aiming to achieve in the amendments tabled to
the Commission proposal.



It has been suggested that the Parliament's report will for the first time
allow the patentability of computer-implemented inventions. This is simply
not true. The patenting of computer-implemented inventions is not a new
phenomenon. Patents involving the use of software have been applied for and
granted since the earliest days of the European Patent Office (EPO). Out of
over 110,000 applications received at the EPO in 2001, 16,000 will have
dealt with inventions in computer-implemented technologies. Indeed, even
without an EU directive, these patents will continue to be filed, not only
to the EPO but also to national patent offices.



As you will be aware, in the US and increasingly in Japan, patents have
been granted for what is essentially pure software. Some EPO and national
court rulings indicate that Europe may be drifting towards extending the
scope of patentability to inventions which would traditionally have not
been patentable, as well as pure business methods. It is clear that Europe
needs a uniform legal approach which draws a line between what can and
cannot be patented, and prevents the drift towards the patentability of
software per se.



My intention is clear in the amendments tabled and in a new Article 4 in
the text, to preclude; the patentability of software as such; the
patentability of business methods; algorithms; and mathematical methods.
Article 4 clearly states that in order to be patentable, a
computer-implemented invention must be susceptible to industrial
applications, be new, and involve an inventive step. Moreover I have added
a requirement for a technical contribution in order to ensure that the mere
use of a computer does not lead to a patent being granted.



Furthermore, the amended directive contains new provisions on decompilation
that will assist software developers. While it is not possible to comment
on whether any patent application would be excluded from the directive, the
directive, as amended, would not permit the patentability of Amazon's
'one-click' method. As far as software itself is concerned, it will not be
possible to patent a software product. Software itself will continue to be
able to be protected by copyright.



With an EU directive, legislators will have scrutiny over the EPO and
national court's decisions. With, in addition, the possibility of having a
definitive ruling from the European Court in Luxembourg, thus ensuring a
restrictive interpretation of the EU directive and a greater degree of
legal certainty in the field of patentability of computer-implemented
inventions.



Some concerns have been raised that the directive may have an adverse
effect on the development of open source software and small software
developers. I support the development of open source software and welcome
the fact that the major open-source companies are recording a 50% growth in
world-wide shipment of its products.



In the amended proposal, I have imposed a requirement on the Commission to
monitor the impact of the directive, in particular its effect on small and
medium sized enterprises, and to look at any potential difficulties in
respect of the relationship between patent protection of
computer-implemented inventions and copyright protection.



Many small companies have given their support to this directive, which will
give them more legal certainty as it offers the possibility of protection
for their R&D investment, and so assists in spin-off creation and
technology transfer and generating new funds for new investments.



Indeed recently, a small ten-person company in an economic black-spot in
the UK granted a licence to a US multinational for its voice recognition
software patents. Without European patent protection in this field, the
small company could have found itself in the perverse situation whereby its
R&D efforts and investment would simply have been taken by a large
multinational company, who, with its team of patent lawyers, would have
filed a patent on this invention. The EU company could have been faced
subsequently with patent infringement proceedings.



Some lobbyists would like us to believe that having no patents is an option
- it is not. No patents would put EU software developers at a severe
disadvantage in the global market place, and would hand over the monopoly
on patents to multinational companies.



The work I have done is an honest attempt to approach this matter
objectively, and to produce balanced legislation, taking into account the
needs and interests of all sectors of the software development industry and
small businesses in Europe. No doubt there will be more debate and
refinements to the legislation before a final text is agreed under the EU
legislation process.



At a time when many of our traditional industries are migrating to Asia and
when Europe needs increasingly to rely on its inventiveness to reap
rewards, it is important to have the option of the revenue secured by
patents and the licensing out of computer-implemented technologies.



Software development is a major European industry. In 1998 alone the value
of the EU software market was ?39 billion. Most of this will be protected
by copyright, but genuine computer-implemented inventions must have the
possibility, for the future of competitiveness of our industry, to have
patent protection.





Yours sincerely



Arlene McCarthy MEP
_______________________________________________
Politech mailing list
Archived at http://www.politechbot.com/
Moderated by Declan McCullagh (http://www.mccullagh.org/)
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,889
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
10-7-2003 Patenting the Obvious - Microsoft gets Patent for Instant Messaging

Microsoft continues the industry trend of trying to patent technology that's been commonly used for nearly three decades. They've filed for a patent on a simple IM programming concept; the "so-and-so is typing a message" monitoring text that appears on the majority of IM clients. The technology's formal name is "System and method for activity monitoring and reporting in a computer network"; the application was approved today by the USPTO.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,889
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
Microsoft is on a roll lately :confused: ;

10-15-2003 Microsoft Patents Your Local Weather Report

Patent 6,632,248Posted by timothy on Wednesday October 15, @10:35AM
from the ask-your-local-ueber-monkeys dept.
theodp writes "After a seven year wait, Microsoft was granted a patent Tuesday for the Customization of network documents by accessing customization information on a server computer using unique user identifiers, patent lawyer-speak for using preferences stored on a server for such purposes as "displaying stock quotes for the companies in which the user is interested, and displaying the user's local weather report.""
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A while back I made a website from existing html tools and website to display local weather without having to download a client program or anything. Based on the nut jobs at the Patent Office my existing use of prior art and common Internet Technology may now belong and owned by Microsoft. This insanity has to stop. Absolute fvcking idiots work at the Patent Office!

Dave's Gainesville Georgia Automatic Weather Update page
 

chowderhead

Platinum Member
Dec 7, 1999
2,633
263
126
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Man it would be better to use talking books. You could just yell out the book name and it would answer where it is.

You would have to pay leapfrog for that because they have a patent on "talking books"

LeapFrog Enterprises, maker of the wildly popular LeapPad educational toy line, has sued Mattel Inc.'s Fisher-Price for allegedly violating its patented talking book technology.

LeapFrog sues over talking books

I am going to $patent$ breathing.
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,889
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
10-28-2003 FTC Issues Report on How to Promote Innovation Through Balancing Competition with Patent Law and Policy

Although questionable patents can harm competition and innovation, valid patents work well with competition to promote innovation. This Report analyzes and makes recommendations for the patent system to maintain the proper balance with competition,? said Timothy J. Muris, FTC Chairman.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It's rare to see one Govt Agency comment negatively on another, glad to see the FTC not afraid to talk about the failings of the Patent Office.
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,889
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
A $6.8 million verdict has been found in favor of Reba Mansell, the widow of a man who invented a system for tracking vehicles with global-positioning technology. The suit alleged that the company had failed to pay the 4% royalty on sales of the vehicle-locating systems. (Oct-31-03) [MIAMI HERALD]

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Huge Corporations, even taking advantage of dead employees.
 

CanOWorms

Lifer
Jul 3, 2001
12,404
2
0
I'd hardly say that the patent office has failed. They're self-funding and the government even takes a portion of their profits so they're left with less resources than they could have.

People act like this during all the patent boom ages like the electrical/telegraph era, automobiles, etc. Usually only about 100 patent cases actually go to court a year anyways (unless something changed in the last few years).
 
Aug 14, 2001
11,061
0
0
So what exactly is the problem here? Every system will have some bad cases. If one of these patents is severely 'bogus', then I'm sure that it can be challenged.

The USPTO is severely undermanned anyways, IMO.
 

CanOWorms

Lifer
Jul 3, 2001
12,404
2
0
Originally posted by: RabidMongoose
So what exactly is the problem here? Every system will have some bad cases. If one of these patents is severely 'bogus', then I'm sure that it can be challenged.

The USPTO is severely undermanned anyways, IMO.

Yeah, seriously... the thread originator probably just has a negative view on everything! Talking about the failings of the Patent Office, lol.
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,889
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
11-8-2003 IBM Applies for Password Manager Patent

IBM has applied for a patent on "A convenient and secure system and method for access to any number of password-protected computer applications, web sites and forms without adding to the user cognitive load and without circumventing the inherent security of such password-protection schemes. An existing password field on a device display is overlaid with password wallet pop-up field which allows a wallet "master" key to unlock the wallet. An application-specific and/or user-specific password is automatically retrieved from the wallet and entered into the password field with no other user action required." This isn't much different from Mozilla's "Master Password"."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I don't think you know what prior art means... (Score:4, Insightful)
by MyNameIsFred (543994) * on Sunday November 09, @12:12PM (#7429119)

Prior art does not mean something generically related. For example, just because lawnmowers have been around forever, doesn't mean that I can't patent a new type of lawnmover. As an example, look at the weedwacker. Lawnmowers existed before it was invented, however, the weedwacker was a new type of lawnmower and, I believe, patentable.
-----------------------------------
The difference is if you made a new "Lawn Whacker" you wouldn't stop all other Lawn Mower Manufacturers from making Lawn Mowers or sue them into paying you Royalties from the grant of the Patent forward or worse yet use the DMCA to stop anyone else from making any other Lawn whacker ever again.

Interesting. Must be Government Employees defending the Patent Office.

Private or public there is no defense for incompetence.

There also is no excuse for what is going on in the U.S. with all this. Europe and the rest of the world, besides for laughing at the U.S., are getting pissed because this nonsense that the U.S. is doing especially with the DMCA is affecting them over there too. In fact the Ink Cartridge issue and battle was waged and Battle won by Europeans against Lexmark.

I would like to thank Europe for what they are doing and apologize to them on behalf of all other Americans (that agree with me, there are some and many on here that support Ashcroft and all other Nanny State and Corporate control) that are sorry that this Country is doing this crap to the world.
 

CanOWorms

Lifer
Jul 3, 2001
12,404
2
0
No, not a government employee. What do you do for a living? Complaining about the patent office has got to be one of the most ridiculous things I've ever read. It officially means that everything has been complained about on AT.

There in incompetence everywhere, we do not live in a fairty-tale world. Maybe about 5% of patent filings initially go through and the rest have to be negotiated. Still some will fall through the cracks especially when you're understaffed.

What ink cartridge battle are you talking about? There are a million of them. Europe is not some shining beacon of light in this world.

WTF are you talking about in the last line? Are you trying to say that the patent office is some tool used by big corporation to control the world? If so, you're incredibly wrong. Smaller firms need patents to acquire venture funding, securing rights in niche markets, preventing large corporations from hurting them, etc. Nowadays over 25% of patents are issued to first-time patentees compared to like 5% in the 80s and before. Studies show that smaller companies spend less on research & development, but then get a larger share of patents compared to large companies spending on r&d.
 
Aug 14, 2001
11,061
0
0
Your 'source' is someone's post on a message board? Is this a joke? Do you have any idea how the patent system works or how some companies use these patents? Why not list the claims of the patent instead since that would be much more useful? This patent hasn't even been granted yet and chances are that it will be amended anyways.

I guarantee you that IBM will not 'enforce' this patent if it is even granted it - it's more of a form of protection. We don't even know what the claims are at this point. I'm not even a government employee or have anything to do with the USPTO - but you obviously have no idea what you're talking about. Everything is a doomsday story to you.

The patent process definitely has problems that should be fixed, but it isn't some sort of 'insanity' or end of the world scenario like you try to portray everything as.
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,889
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
11-20-2003 AT&T Sues PayPal and eBay for Patent Infringement

AT&T on Thursday fired the latest shot in the escalating Web patent wars, filing suit against PayPal and eBay. AT&T issued a press release alleging that the PayPal and BillPoint payment systems infringe on AT&T's 1994 patent for the mediation of transactions by a communications system. Besides e-Payments, the AT&T patent purports to cover e-Voting, e-Auctions, e-Gifts, e-Donations, e-Wishlists and e-Referrals.

The AT&T suit comes amid heightened activity and controversy in software patents. The issue has gained special attention since the University of California and an affiliated company won a $521 million suit against Microsoft that may force significant changes in Microsoft's Internet Explorer Web browser. In an unusual development, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office said it would re-evaluate the patent that gave rise to that suit.

The suit, filed in federal district court in Delaware, claims that eBay and PayPal's online payment systems infringe on AT&T patent No. 5,329,589, "Mediation of transactions by a communications system."

That patent, according to an AT&T release announcing the suit, describes "transactions in which a trusted intermediary securely processes payments over a communications system such as the Internet. The use of a trusted intermediary ensures that one party will not have to disclose sensitive information, such as a credit card number or bank account number, to the other party to the transaction."



 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,889
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
1-4-2013

http://yro.slashdot.org/story/13/01...utm_source=rss1.0mainlinkanon&utm_medium=feed

USPTO Asks For Input On Software Patents



"The patent office is reviewing its policy on software patents and is asking for feedback.


Groklaw reports that the USPTO will be hosting a pair of roundtable sessions in February, during which the public will have the ability to attend and put forth their viewpoints. From the article: 'It's obvious the USPTO realizes there is serious unhappiness among software developers, and they'd like to improve things.


Software developers are the folks most immediately and directly affected by the software patents the USPTO issues, and it's getting to the point that no one can code anything without potentially getting sued.


If you can make it to Silicon Valley on February 12 or New York City on February 27, go and make your voice heard."