Patent holder persecutes Pennsylvania photographer

Outfit that sued Pennsylvania photographer over a patent allegedly covering online photo contests must pay attorney fees after a pro bono defense by lawyers for the Electronic Frontier Foundation [ArsTechnica]

2 Comments

  • “…arguing that the photo contest patent should be thrown out as abstract under the Supreme Court’s Alice Corp. precedent, as hundreds of other patents have been in the past two years.”

    If only the patent office would stick to issuing patents that were, well, patentable. Likely the courts grant substantial deference to the patent office, and when hundreds are being tossed, it is likely that thousands would be toss-able if litigated, and vastly more in the grey zone of deference that should never have been issued.

    Patent office needs to be more robust in its review and stop punting such garbage down the road for the courts to have to sort out.

  • “If only the patent office would stick to issuing patents that were, well, patentable.”

    The patent office tries to do that. The Federal Circuit overrules them every time they do.

    Every recent SCOTUS patent decision that voided a patent was overturning a Federal Circuit decision upholding the validity of the patent.

    Almost immediately after the federal circuit was created and given sole jurisdiction over patent appeals, the Fed Circuit justices made it there mission to interpret the constitution and the patent act in such a way as to maximize the breadth of patentable subject matter and minimize any exception or exclusions.

    The patent office used to accept journal articles and other publications as evidence of prior art until the Federal circuit ruled that only another patent can qualify as prior art.

    The patent office refused to grant software only and business method patents until the fed circuit told them that they had to issue such patents.