Articles

I am continually amazed at the lack of prior art searches done by major corporations. Microsoft certainly would have found it was infringing if it had done an exhaustive prior art search. The same goes for other corporations. At a billion and a half dollars, Microsoft certainly would have saved their money if it had done so. But, this begs the question, do corporations purposely not do prior art searches because it just doesn't matter? If violating another patent results in billion of dollars in profits (as in RIM), what is a measly half billion dollar settlement? High tech firms profits are accrued in the immediacy of the moment. Whatever patents they receive are outdated within a few years. And with patent application pendency running more than six years, for most high tech inventions, does it really matter? It really seems to be a free-for-all in regards to patents. For all sides the US patent system is a joke.

The US Patent and Trademark office, established in 1790 is really the gatekeeper for American technological leadership and innovation.

There seems to be some need for tinkering around the edges, but I say "if it aint broke, dont fix it."

Matthew Hartogh