"Such (extraneous, targeted, patent) litigation has become an expensive and often existential plague for tech companies of all sizes."
Philadelphia, PA (PRWEB) January 10, 2013
An multitude of voices are sounding the call for a critical analysis and implementation of legislation for patent reform. Many of these voices were heard at the 2013 CES Innovation Policy Summit. Talks surrounding the desire for legislation reform echoed Congressman Peter DeFazio (D-OR) and his introduction of HR 6245, the bipartisan Saving High-tech Innovators from Egregious Legal Disputes (SHIELD) Act created and designed to well, "shield" American tech companies from frivolous patent lawsuits.
As Larry Downes, a contributor at Forbes wrote, "Panelists representing Google, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, online retailer Newegg, electronics manufacturer Voxx and Home Automation, Inc. shared horror stories of defending against frivolous patent infringement lawsuits. The panel then violently agreed that such litigation has become an expensive and often existential plague for tech companies of all sizes." Echoing this, as DeFazio has noted, patent litigation cost $29 billion, in direct costs alone, in 2011. That's in one year, and that is a lot of money that potentially could have been utilized for advancing technology.
The reason for all these extraneous costs? Trolls. Not mythical creatures, but companies that obtain copious amounts of patents from inventors or failing companies with the sole purpose of using said patents to sue other companies for infringement. These "patent trolls" have become the target of focus by the Consumer Electronics Association, which produces CES, as well as policy makers such as Rep DeFazio.
Shockingly, sixty percent of all patent lawsuits are now filed by such companies. As Google senior patent counsel Suzanne Michel said, these lawsuits represent nothing more than a “tax on innovation."
With all this bubbling turmoil over how to protect companies, inventors, and at the same time prevent and diminish the alarmingly exploding rates of patent infringement lawsuits, the need for patent attorneys and patent agents, is growing. There are nuances between the two (Patent Agent vs Attorney), and many individuals are not 1) aware of this distinction, or that 2) many individuals also have the potential TO become a patent agent or attorney. Both agents and attorneys must have a background in science or engineering Both must pass the patent bar examination. However, attorneys are also admitted to the bar of a state(s), and this this allows a patent attorney to enforce a patent in court our defend the patent holder in court. In the growing turmoil of patent litigation and exploding intellectual property markets, companies, law firms, are seeking individuals with a good amount of experience in science and technology fields who are also qualified to file, and if necessary, defend patents.
The high costs surrounding patent litigation, the need for tighter patent reform, and the ever expanding market in technology and sciences only mean that at least for now, entering and working in the realm of patents and patent litigation will be a viable, and for sure, stimulating and dynamic, vocation.
About the Wysebridge Patent Bar Review Company
The Wysebridge Patent Bar Review Company is an emerging information and educational company formed in 2012. The company’s sole purpose is to enhance the lives of individuals by assisting their studies to pass the patent bar exam. The company does this by collecting, processing, and summarizing information and data about the exam, providing the most effective and efficient study materials available.