Microsoft pushes for single global patent system
A senior lawyer at Microsoft is calling for the creation of a global patent system to make it easier and faster for corporations to enforce their intellectual property rights around the world.
In a blog posting on Tuesday, Microsoft's Deputy General Counsel Horacio Gutierrez said that a backlog of patent applications internationally was needed to tackle the 3.5 million pending patent applications around the world--including around 750,000 in the US.
"In today's world of universal connectivity, global business and collaborative innovation, it is time for a world patent that is derived from a single patent application, examined and prosecuted by a single examining authority and litigated before a single judicial body," said Guiterrez. "A harmonized, global patent system would resolve many of the criticisms leveled at national patent systems over unmanageable backlogs and interminable pendency periods."
Guiterrez went on to praise efforts to harmonize international patent systems through projects such ad the Patent Prosecution Highway and the "IP5" partnership but said more needed to be done to allow corporations to protect their intellectual property.
"By facing the challenges, realizing a vision, overcoming political barriers, and removing procedural obstacles we can build a global patent system that will promote innovation, enrich public knowledge, encourage competition and drive economic growth and employment," he added. "The time is now--the solutions are in reach."
Microsoft's calls to speed up the issuing of patents come shortly after the company was prosecuted in Texas for patent infringement concerning its Word application. In August, US District Court for the Eastern District of Texas issued a permanent injunction that "prohibits Microsoft from selling or importing to the United States any Microsoft Word products that have the capability of opening .XML, .DOCX or DOCM files (XML files) containing custom XML", according to a statement released by attorneys for the plaintiff, i4i.
Commenting on Microsoft's appeal of the ruling late last month. i4i chairman Loudon Owen told ZDNet UK's sister site, CNET News, that the software giant's attitude was "extraordinary." "It captures the hostile attitude of Microsoft toward inventors who dare to enforce patents against them," Owen said. "It is also blatantly derogatory about the court system."
Microsoft's stance on stronger software patents has attracted opposition from the open-source community and other antipatent campaigners.
The founder of the GNU Linux project Richard Stallman, recently warned against the use of Mono software tools as they exposed users to potential patent violation accusations from Microsoft. In an article published by the Free Software Foundation, Stallman said that "only fools would ignore" the threat poised by Microsoft's patents.
The UK Pirate Party, which was registered by the electoral commission last month, is also opposed to the current patent system--especially in the area of health care--and has put reform of the process at the center of its campaign for the next election. "Monopolies maintained by companies producing life-saving drugs mean people are dying, as they can't afford (treatment)," the party's leader Andrew Robinson told ZDNet UK last month.
Microsoft's backing for greater cooperation on the issue has the backing of other organizations. The World Intellectual Property Organization is planning to hold a conference on global enforcement of intellectual property rights in Geneva on the 17th and 18th of September. "IP systems need to keep pace with globalizing trends in innovation and business practices," the organization said in a statement. "The symposium offers stakeholders an opportunity to explore how existing highly diverse national and regional IP infrastructures can be developed to support the dynamics of innovation which is increasingly transnational and borderless."
FSF Europe and the UK Pirate Party were approached for comment but did not reply in time for this story.
Andrew Donoghue of ZDNet UK reported from London.
It seems to me that we'd hear a lot less from you if so.
@Seaspray0:
The EU would definitely want in on this idea, and sue anyone that has enough money to keep the EU in the lifestyle that they have become accustomed to. Mind you, that's the EU regulatory body, not the member countries.
It should also be reverseable so if people want to back out of it if they find it has less protection.
How about in Geneva, Switzerland!!! The same place where the World Court is located.
How about if it is located in Geneva, Switzerland!!! The same location of the World Court.
Cool!
A patent was granted a few years ago for "circular transportation device" (can't remeber the exact woriding)...but it turned out it was a prank that describe 'the wheel'. And they approved it. what a joke.
I'd rather see some sort of improvement. While a worldwide system is highly improbably, neither am I so paranoid to believe that everything is a Microsoft conspiracy to take over the world.
Say NO to the U.N. too, and no to European Union style centralizations of power!
You know, there was another person who believed like you that there should be a centralization of powers and at any cost regardless of what the member countries wanted. That single person knew what was good for the world and they were going to make sure everyone followed their lead through the power of military might.
Thankfully Germany didn't win World War II.
I understand that Hitler wore pants; therefore, if you wear pants you must love Nazis!
Yes, yes there is. But Apple wont approve it.
Corporations don't invent anything. They take the work of others and make it their own.
However if they do this the corporate patent should last for the product cycle. Which is less than 5 years these days?
Microsoft?
The whole system should be fixed to prevent all these broad patents being issued.
The company should have an initial temporary patent granted, in that time if they haven't used it in any product, it is revoked, end of, no re-applying for 6 months as punishment.
And software patents should ****, period.
Microsoft can go jump off a cliff if they think of trying to push this in the EU, they have already been trying to do this (along with others) but it got rejected by the majority.
Software patents are a HORRIBLE creation and need to die a painful death.
Software evolves every single year, patents have absolutely no place in such a market, especially when it comes to trolls patenting very simple operations that can only be done in one way.
I'll never work for any company that plans on stealing any of my ideas. And it is exactly why i am self-employed. :)
The badly broken US patent system would have to be reformed first.
And then, other countries have different rules of what is patentable.
1) Patents only last 7 years or less
2) Software cannot be patented
3) Standardization of patent royalties is developed as well
and separately, Trademarks get a shorter life span as well
Besides those idiots in the patent office don't know software innovation when they see it. I see story after story of companies that get patents for blatantly obvious technology or technology that describes something in existence before the patent was applied for.
Doesn't almost every software application support opening xml documents? Are all of those companies going to get sued if the lawsuit against Microsoft holds up?
They day dream they can patent "democracy", "free speech" and "daylight savings time".
Tough luck, not all the world's a sucker.
As Lincoln once said: "You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time..."
I like the idea of a global patent system as the current system is very expensive for inventors to patent their inventions. So on that front it would benefit the innovators.
However like a lot here I agree that patents must adhere to a reasonable time. Therefore patents should have different time limits according to where they apply. It is obvious in the IT area that the time period is too long. I would also shorten trademark and royalty periods too.
- by Michichael September 2, 2009 5:52 PM PDT
- I'm always wary of companies championing "good causes" that directly benefit them...
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
Showing 1 of 2 pages (55 Comments)