Critics: Patent overhaul could hurt startups

September 14, 2011
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

When the Senate passed legislation last week overhauling the U.S. patent system, large multinational corporations like Eli Lilly and Co. rejoiced. But small-business advocates cried foul, saying the changes would put innovative startups at a disadvantage.

“This legislation will irreversibly damage the ability of small-business owners and entrepreneurs to create, develop and commercialize their innovations,” National Small Business Association chief Todd McCracken said in a prepared statement.

The America Invents Act, which President Obama is expected to sign, is intended to speed up the patent review process, strengthen the quality of patents, and bring the United States in line with other countries by awarding a patent to the first inventor to apply for it.

That first-to-file provision is a change from the U.S.’s existing first-to-invent rule, eliminating the time-consuming process of determining who had an idea first.

But that’s the rub, small biz backers say. They predict the resulting rush to the patent office will favor large companies that have the resources file applications early and often.

Indeed, the change will increase the capital burden for innovative startups out of the gate, said Joe Trebley, head of startup support and promotion at the Indiana University Research & Technology Corp.

“It doesn’t allow startups to delay their patent costs,” he said. “They will need to raise that capital a little earlier.”

On the other hand, the shift could save companies money later, said Marie Kerbeshian, IURTC’s vice president for technology commercialization. Under the current system, a dispute over who was the first to invent a product or process can be costly as well as lengthy. And the legislation will lower patent fees for the smallest companies.

Still, Kerbeshian admits that the patent system overhaul—which IU supported—will require some adjustments for smaller organizations and entities that are focused on the U.S. market.

“Whenever you’re looking at worldwide markets, you’re already trying to file early,” she said. “If you weren’t first to file, you’re losing those markets anyway.”

IURTC patent counsel Brian Cholewa expects to see innovative firms of all sizes filing for patents earlier—increasing the use of provisional applications that are updated as development continues.

“Time will be more critical,” he said.

No doubt. But will small businesses suffer as a result? What do you think?

ADVERTISEMENT
  • I think it will be GOOD if folks use the Provisional Patent Application process...
    I LOVE this! I LOVE it ONLY because of the Provisional Patent Application Process...

    I LOVE the first to file! It allows me to spend $110 and file a Provisional Patent Application and level the playing field between me and guys like Xerox!

    It is BRILLIANT. Gone are the days of the big companies fabricating inventors notebooks and saying THEY invented what the little guy invented.

    Also, filing a PPA can be done in a day or two with the Provisional Patent Video Course http://provisionalpatentvideo.com/ website for less than fifty bucks!

    I know lawyers HATE the PPA because there is no path for future income from Office Actions.. However the smart patent attorneys will wise up and figure out if they help folks filing a PPA that later they will come back for the NPA!

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. The east side does have potential...and I have always thought Washington Scare should become an outlet mall. Anyone remember how popular Eastgate was? Well, Indy has no outlet malls, we have to go to Edinburgh for the deep discounts and I don't understand why. Jim is right. We need a few good eastsiders interested in actually making some noise and trying to change the commerce, culture and stereotypes of the East side. Irvington is very progressive and making great strides, why can't the far east side ride on their coat tails to make some changes?

  2. Boston.com has an article from 2010 where they talk about how Interactions moved to Massachusetts in the year prior. http://www.boston.com/business/technology/innoeco/2010/07/interactions_banks_63_million.html The article includes a link back to that Inside Indiana Business press release I linked to earlier, snarkily noting, "Guess this 2006 plan to create 200-plus new jobs in Indiana didn't exactly work out."

  3. I live on the east side and I have read all your comments. a local paper just did an article on Washington square mall with just as many comments and concerns. I am not sure if they are still around, but there was an east side coalition with good intentions to do good things on the east side. And there is a facebook post that called my eastside indy with many old members of the eastside who voice concerns about the east side of the city. We need to come together and not just complain and moan, but come up with actual concrete solutions, because what Dal said is very very true- the eastside could be a goldmine in the right hands. But if anyone is going damn, and change things, it is us eastside residents

  4. Please go back re-read your economics text book and the fine print on the February 2014 CBO report. A minimum wage increase has never resulted in a net job loss...

  5. The GOP at the Statehouse is more interested in PR to keep their majority, than using it to get anything good actually done. The State continues its downward spiral.

ADVERTISEMENT