I am concerned that this will give large companies with experience filing patents a big advantage over small businesses and independent inventors, but naively this seems like it suppresses patent trolling. Right now, if A invents an idea before B, A can wait until B files the patent, develops a product, and then A can file. Since A invented before, he trumps B's patent, and now can extort money from B (since B has invested in product development which is dependent on the patent). In a first-to-file scheme, patent-holders can be confident that their intellectual property won't be taken.
The real question is this in "first to file": How does this affect so called intellectual "property" entering the public domain by choice of the inventor?
If inventor A invents something useful and foundational and open-sources it because he feels it benefits all mankind, can some greedy turd patent it later and yank it back out of the public domain because he was "first to file"?
Currently all I have to do is invent the thing and publish it and it becomes prior art, no need to file anything because I'm first to invent and I proved it by publishing. Under this new system do I have to file first and pay for it before I can declare it public domain?
I doubt the prior art requirements would change. Today, you can't (in theory) get a patent if prior art exists. If Inventor A open sources the invention, prior art is pretty easy to prove.
The bigger issue is that, unless the patent office happens to notice Inventor A's work while process the patent, which, of course, is no different than it is today.
That's not the way patent trolling works. Normally the troll buys a portfolio of existing patents, then waits for someone with deep pockets to infringe. It's usually the victim who tries to argue that the invention predates the patent.
I can't see it helping the little guy, because if one party has infinitely deep pockets and the other can't afford to fight anything in court, then the larger party can lawyer up and beat the little guy into submission regardless of what the law says.
Comments
I am concerned that this will give large companies with experience filing patents a big advantage over small businesses and independent inventors, but naively this seems like it suppresses patent trolling. Right now, if A invents an idea before B, A can wait until B files the patent, develops a product, and then A can file. Since A invented before, he trumps B's patent, and now can extort money from B (since B has invested in product development which is dependent on the patent). In a first-to-file scheme, patent-holders can be confident that their intellectual property won't be taken.
The real question is this in "first to file": How does this affect so called intellectual "property" entering the public domain by choice of the inventor?
If inventor A invents something useful and foundational and open-sources it because he feels it benefits all mankind, can some greedy turd patent it later and yank it back out of the public domain because he was "first to file"?
Currently all I have to do is invent the thing and publish it and it becomes prior art, no need to file anything because I'm first to invent and I proved it by publishing. Under this new system do I have to file first and pay for it before I can declare it public domain?
I doubt the prior art requirements would change. Today, you can't (in theory) get a patent if prior art exists. If Inventor A open sources the invention, prior art is pretty easy to prove.
The bigger issue is that, unless the patent office happens to notice Inventor A's work while process the patent, which, of course, is no different than it is today.
That's not the way patent trolling works. Normally the troll buys a portfolio of existing patents, then waits for someone with deep pockets to infringe. It's usually the victim who tries to argue that the invention predates the patent.
I can't see it helping the little guy, because if one party has infinitely deep pockets and the other can't afford to fight anything in court, then the larger party can lawyer up and beat the little guy into submission regardless of what the law says.