women25

After substantially watering down the House version of a far-reaching patent bill, inventors and small businesses are now gunning to quash the Senate version of the bill. For the third time in this decade, U.S. lawmakers are trying to change the country's patent system by considering a series of measures that would change the business of innovation and the millions of dollars that come with patent royalty payments. Up for consideration are whether patent applications should be made public before the patent is issued, whether third parties will be given a broader right to ask patent examiners to re-examine the validity of a patent, and whether companies using a technology before it was patented should be sheltered from dishing out huge royalty payments to patent owners. The Washington-based Alliance for American Innovation (AAI) and several small-business groups representing individual investors helped persuade the House to drop two key provisions from the bill before it passed that chamber. Those provisions would have made patent applications public after 18 months and given unrelated parties a shot at a patent by asking patent examiners to re-examine the quality of the patent. "We now focus our efforts on the Senate bill," says Beverly Selby, the head of AAI who also worked as a senior policy analyst for former President Ronald Reagan. Selby says her group will push for the Senate committee considering the patent bill to drop the provisions that were excluded from the House version. If the group fails in this effort, "we will try to kill the bill," from reaching the full Senate floor, Selby says. But Michael Kirk, executive director of the American Intellectual Property Law Association, will fight to keep the controversial provisions in the Senate bill. The property law association believes the 18-month publication provision will ultimately help inventors generate new capital to commercialize their products. Also, the association wants the patent re-examination clause inserted in the bill because it believes the quality of patents will improve under increased examination. "We are confident that the provisions that were dropped will remain in the Senate bill," Kirk says. "That makes the bill much stronger and will eventually help American inventors and companies." Capitol Hill sources say the patent bill will come under fire from several Democratic senators and even from a few Republicans including Sen. Christopher Bond, R-Mo., the head of the Senate Small Business Committee. Bond's committee has not taken a position on the bill yet, but a committee source hinted the provisions dropped from the House may have to be dropped from the Senate version to gain support. Rob Risser, a Michigan-based businessman who heads the Washington-based Small Business Technology Coalition, says the bill will have to be significantly changed to garner the support from small businesses and inventors. Risser points to a provision to develop a patent advisory board that will act as consultants to the system. The House version calls for a 12-member board appointed by the president, the House speaker and the Senate majority leader. The Senate version calls for a five-member board appointed by the president. "We just don't think small businesses will have much of a participation under this board," Risser says. "We want this bill to give us assurance that at least 44 percent of the people on the board are representatives for small business and individual investors." According to coalition's estimates, 44 percent of domestic patent applications are filed by small business and individual inventors. The patent bill is being treated as one of the most important bills for American businesses in decades. Numerous tries in previous years to change patent laws have fallen by the wayside. With the House's passage of the bill, supporters of a patent overhaul believe there may be hope this year. Sougata Mukherjee is Washington Bureau Chief for the San Antonio Business Journal.