US technology field unites in legislation provisions patent reform
AmberWave Systems has joined three other New Hampshire-based organizations, as well as more than 100 additional signatories, including universities, venture capital firms, small and large technology businesses, and research parks across the U.S. to voice their concern with certain provisions of patent reform legislation currently under consideration by Congress.
The stakeholders voicing concerns over the current patent reform legislation represent industries such as electronics, telecommunications, life sciences, computer hardware, financial services, chemical and biotechnology. Along with AmberWave Systems, the group sent a letter to key lawmakers within the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate to stress the adverse consequences the bill, as written, would have on their ability to innovate.For such companies and university research centres, the consequences – greater bureaucracy, inability to rely on valid patents, weakened protections against infringement and a decreased access to capital – would be devastating.
"This is not only an issue for American innovation, but also an issue that drives at the heart of New Hampshire's future economic health," said Bryan Lord, vice president of finance & licensing and general counsel for AmberWave Systems. "As all of New England, and in particular New Hampshire, transitions itself from a manufacturing to an innovation economy, a strong intellectual property system for small and medium-sized companies is of high importance. The most controversial provisions of this bill do not support that goal."
The Patent Reform Act of 2007 was introduced in April this year and is championed by a subset of the nation's largest information technology companies that are advocating wholesale changes to the U.S. patent laws. However, many of the small to mid-sized businesses, as well as a number of larger companies, venture capital firms and university research entities, believe that some of the proposed reform provisions hold serious negative consequences for continued innovation and American technological market position in the increasingly competitive 21st Century global economy.
The letter expressed strong concern with certain provisions on the proposed Act, such as those dealing with apportionment of monetary damages for patent infringement, expansive PTO rule-making authority, an open-ended post-grant opposition system, and a narrow first-to-file grace period. Those provisions, they believe, will not strengthen the country's patent system; rather they will fundamentally undermine patent certainty, discourage investment in innovative technologies, and reduce publication and collaborative activities among academic scientists.
The letter expressed support for The Innovation Agenda, recently released by United States Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, which calls for improving intellectual property protections, strengthening the patent system and ending the diversion of patent fees, among other important goals.
"We hope that Congress will instead seek to enhance America's environment for innovation and competitiveness through improved patent quality, and thoughtfully address our concerns as it considers this historic legislation," Lord added.
