Hunsaker: New Definition of Prior Art Promotes Imitation Not Innovation
Kelly C. Hunsaker writes a piece titled Taking Care of Business, which takes a look at the Patent Reform Act of 2005.
Hunsaker believes the Act "goes a long way toward addressing many troubling aspects of the current patent system." Hunsaker, however, does take issue with a new limitation on prior art.
New Section 102(b) states that subject matter is publicly known only when it becomes "reasonably and effectively accessible," i.e., a person of ordinary skill in the art must be able to "gain access to" and "comprehend" the subject matter without resort to "undue efforts."
On this new limitation, Hunsaker writes:
Aug. 29, 2005 - Patent Reform Act Amendment to Make Inequitable Conduct a Circus.
Aug. 24, 2005 - Cringely: Patent Reform Unfair to Absent-Minded Inventors.
Aug. 23, 2005 - Draft Amendment to Patent Act of 2005 Circulating.
Hunsaker believes the Act "goes a long way toward addressing many troubling aspects of the current patent system." Hunsaker, however, does take issue with a new limitation on prior art.
New Section 102(b) states that subject matter is publicly known only when it becomes "reasonably and effectively accessible," i.e., a person of ordinary skill in the art must be able to "gain access to" and "comprehend" the subject matter without resort to "undue efforts."
On this new limitation, Hunsaker writes:
This proposed "clarification" of prior art is about as clear as mud. It breeds uncertainty and, many will argue, drastically narrows the body of prior art. . . .Prior posts:
The bottom line is that the redefinition rewards imitation, and would be litigated for the next decade to show otherwise.
Aug. 29, 2005 - Patent Reform Act Amendment to Make Inequitable Conduct a Circus.
Aug. 24, 2005 - Cringely: Patent Reform Unfair to Absent-Minded Inventors.
Aug. 23, 2005 - Draft Amendment to Patent Act of 2005 Circulating.
