Patent Reform Act of 2007 only benefits corporations and hurts small inventors

Unfortunately, the American media tends to neglect news without explosions or death. While news of this nature is important, most Americans are clueless as to our government’s newest attempt to bow down to globalism: the Patent Reform Act of 2007.

There is no doubt that the American patent system is the best in the world. This has aided in keeping America at the forefront of technology and innovation. Our founding fathers envisioned a patent system above all else, yet still, some want to destroy America’s exceptional system.

This bill has already been pushed through the House and has left the Senate Judiciary Committee. Despite objections from several Republican legislators, many members of Congress seem OK with betraying individual rights and U.S. sovereignty.

For some reason, traitorous globalists like Rep. Howard Berman, D-Ca., want to “harmonize” our system with others world-wide. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., says this bill will fix patent law inconsistencies around the globe.

Why is it in America’s interest to weaken our patent system to be level with other inferior systems, especially when U.S. standards of living are envious world-wide?

A quick history lesson would tell you that the reforms of 1999 permit the U.S. Patent Office to publish patent applications via the internet before a patent is actually granted. But with a lack of funding to the U.S. Patent Office, over the years there has been such a massive build-up of applications awaiting approval that applications are available on the Internet for months, possibly even years.

Patent pirates, most notably those in China, have months to steal invention ideas online and go into production in their foreign lands. This has largely become the method for Chinese research and development.

Prior to this, the U.S. Patent Office had to keep patent applications a secret until the patent was officially granted. If it was denied, the application was returned to the rightful owner, where he or she could perfect the idea.

Under this new bill, a first-to-file system would be created and our first-to-invent method would be disbanded.

First-to-file would hurt the small-time inventor and benefit the corporations. Large corporations with greater resources could beat out Joe inventor with multiple patent filings.

First-to-file is also unconstitutional. The U.S. Constitution protects ownership rights of “inventors.” It does not protect “filers.”

The new law would require the U.S. patent law to post applications 18 months after the date of the application. This provides those mischievous Chinese with even more time to cheat the U.S. inventor.

The act would reduce the punishment judges and juries could award independent inventors if it’s proven that their rights were infringed. This would further the advantages of huge companies and their wealth.

Post-grant review, a process that would permit patent infringers the right to challenge a patent after it is issued absent a court appearance, would make it easier for patents to be stolen.

Yet again, here is another win for multinational corporations.

The Patent Reform Act would weaken U.S. trade laws that prevent foreign companies from producing and exporting things to the U.S. with stolen intellectual property. This is a subtle approval for transferring U.S. jobs and technology abroad.

It is also worthy to mention that this act lacks congressional responsibility by placing increased power in the U.S. Patent Office.

If Congress truly wants to amend U.S. patent law, it should consider restoring the patent system to its pre-1999 state. It should restore the fees paid by inventors to the U.S. Patent Office so they can train more employees to break the build-up and get patents granted more efficiently and faster.

The U.S. risks losing sovereignty and sacrificing its technological lead in the world if it doesn’t do this.

Our patent system is vital in maintaining our competitive edge against other countries. We simply cannot flirt with losing this strategically beneficial position.

Information from –