NEVADA INVENTORS ASSOCIATION

"The past is prologue,

Study the past"

To go to the main Page

Next Meeting ; July 25 1998 @ 9 AM WMC Room 101

Picnic Information

Our club picnic will be at 10:00 AM on August 22nd, at Gary Fosburg's home in Pleasant Valley. See Map.

There will be fried chicken, potato salad, chips, soft drinks and snacks. If last year's picnic is any indication, there will be lots of fun things, great conversations, making new friends and laughter all around. Dungarees, slacks, comfortable shoes and shirts are in order. Anyone caught in a suit and tie will be soundly thrashed about the head and shoulders.

No charge to NIA members and their guests. President Don Evans has very generously offered to pick up the tab for $100 worth of eats and drinks. That's a mighty nice gesture. A gift from the prez to the club. We say "THANK YOU, DON."

Last year some folks brought other foods that were very welcome and very delicious. If anyone feels that they would like to do that again, pease feel free to do it. It is not necessary, but always welcome. Please call Don, at 322-9636 and let him know. We haven't planned any dessert, so maybe something like that would be good.

Don't forget --- it's an inventors' club, so if you have a prototype of your invention, bring it along to show off. Even market ready products will be accepted for show. No invention to expose to the public yet??? Bring something interesting.

Here is a letter on Senate Bill S507 legislation

This is a rebuttal to letter written by Herb Wamsley (exec. dir. for IPO) that appeared in a newletter of Edison Inventors Association (EIA) in Ft. Myers, Florida.

Dear Dr. Gary H. Nelson, President, EIA;
(cc:Herb Wamsley, Exec. Dir. IPO)

Herb Wamsley, whom I know, does well in promoting the IPO view, and by inference, so should the Edison Inventors Association. I ask your members to consider what is good for the IPO, NAM, AIPLA, 21st Century Patent Coalition (all essentially large entities), is NOT good for small entities, independent inventors, and others of limited means. Now there is some merit in S.507 Title III (Patent Term Restoration) and Title VI (Miscellaneous Provisions) which in the former case will stop "submarine" patents caused by the PTO, and in the latter case some needed housekeeping and clarifications... if some clever legislation writers do not corrupt it (the S.507 current text) with some clauses favoring narrow special interests. Please also know that the IPO promulgated a S.507 prototype in 1992, which went nowhere because of many flaws which were detected by many, like this writer, who voiced opposition. But Herb and his colleagues are a determined lot and keep resurfacing legislative initiatives favoring their memberships. They are trying again by backing S.507, and its counterpart HR400 which is not in the interest of ALL entities!

Briefly, and I hope succinctly, I present the flaws and suggested remedies for Titles I, II, IV, V, (while conceding III and VI to enable progress) so we might make our Legislators aware of the defects, and to stop mischief by some elitists who would claim to know what is good for all entities.

Title I - Corporations of the PTO. This sets up a Czar and a puppet Advisory Board which does not have the teeth of a Board of Directors of a private corporation. Congress seems keen to abrogate real oversight in the arcane business of patents and trademarks and leave it to a Czar who would be difficult to remove from power. A governing Board overseering the "Czar" would restore a balance of power. But that matter is small potatoes to the establishment of authority to take on up to TWO BILLION dollars in debt, to be paid for by the clients of the PTO by HIGHER FEES! And for what for what, a new temple to agrandize the Czar? If one has visited Crystal City one will note the PTO is in palacial digs which have a commercial life of over 30 years, meets their proximity and convienience desires and could easily accomodate expansion. The cost of new construction, which would come from the new debt, is eliminated and almost trivial if the GSA does a land swap with the current landlord. Some desireable Govt lands in DC could be made available to compensate the landlord and the PTO would have a good home which could be refurbished to suit, at minimal cost and paid for from current revenues. Also we should continue the civil service status of the staff under special industry competitive guidelines which Congress could enable. Further if Title I were enabled it should prohibit deverting funds from the PTO until normal income exceeds 15% over expenses. We must insist on using PTO client monies for service and not as a honeypot!

Title II - 18 Month (Premature) Patent Publication. An absolute waste of money to implement and imposes useless expense to applicants and patentees! Please know this is a step toward unwanted patent harmonization with other country systems and a means to delay patent issue and effectively shortening the useful life of patents, mitigated somewhat by Title III of the current S.507. There have been, almost cost free, alternatives presented for all who would benefit from early publication. This Title has no real benefit for a significant majority of patentees and is almost a year late in providing patent in process information over other means to facilitate legitimate exploitation, particularly through licensing. Studies of time spans to patent issue further demonstrate the folly of Title II.

Title IV - Prior User Rights.(PUR) This is a subtle, but real, license to steal! The attendant legal process to enable the "defence" against infringing an issued patent, is at least as costly as for interference proceedings which was the earlier scarecrow for the uninitiated. This process can be intimidating and expensive, particularly for the less affluent. PUR will deminish the value of patents, as all who wish to assert the right of infringement defence can, if there is enough monetary value at stake. The solution is not to reduce the sanctity of patents, but to encourage all patentees to license their patents, under reasonable terms and to obtain royalties from those who chose to keep their alleged invention a trade secret. This consistant with our first to invent system, and allows recourse to legitmate first inventors under exiting procedures.

Title V - Rexamination (Requested by Third Parties) Existing provisions for reexams have been in place since 1980! If this were enacted a third party could request a rexam and tie up commercializtion of a patent which is a mischief which could stop a licensing negotiation by the delaying tactic. The republic will not collapse if this Title is never enacted! Patentees do not need this although some lawyers will tell you that the third party rexam will strengthen a patent. Indeed! Delaying mischief 0possibiities are never mentioned at the same time.

Needed New Legislation (Exposing a dirty little secret). What few discuss is that nothing in this legislation will help us in filing and keeping our patents, particularly in foreign lands. Few understand that the tax called Patent Maintenance (aka Annuities out side the US)is a principal reason few can afford to patent outside the US. While we issue 100-120,000 patents a year, it is the reason over 30,000 US patents are prematurely expired each year, with the resultant loss of protected property and the investment used to obtain that property! The IPO should work on the elimination of maintenance fees which in turn can influence foreign patent offices to end this coercive tax, of no value to patent owners! A plan has been "on the street" since 1992 which actually reduces the cost of patent ownership, provides a full patent term, and encourages reciprocal treatment by foreign patent offices. This plan is a bit arcane, but can be proven as benificial to patent applicants and grantees if they will take time to understand. Please note that under current law the patent grant is a charade. Patentees should read their patent certificate, which tells them that if they don't pay the maintenance fees their "rental" of the "grant" will be expired, as well as their investment in obtaining a patent!

When will these truths become self evident and we stop the gaming of the less initiated to the patent process, with the help of our legislators? Stop S.507 and ask our legislators to take up the case for all entities, and not just for the well endowed who use the US patent system.

w/Regards to my friends in Ft. Myers, Ed Tutle, Tech Transfer Consultant, Orlando FL.

Your are visitor to this page.

"The past is prologue, Study the past"

To go to the main Page or goto Newsletters