The “Dear Senator” letters and memoranda on patent reform have been flying fast and furious over the last several weeks. The rhetoric of late is at an all time high and seems to reflect the “false choice” on innovation described by PTO Director Jon Dudas in his explanation of the Bush administration’s letter of opposition to the Senate bill (S.1145, The Patent Reform Act of 2007) – some describe the bill as an innovation killer while others paint it as necessary for the survival of some of our most innovative industries.
The letters are, for the most part, non-revealing because we’ve known where the lines have been drawn in this battle for so long. Most contain the same recycled language and few present any new or interesting information, causing many of us that follow the issue to glaze over them quickly.
At least one should have raised our eyebrows, though. According to this article from Inside Higher Ed, the Coalition for Patent Fairness, which counts Google, Microsoft, Intel, Micron and other computer/software companies as members, circulated a memorandum last week that claimed that the concerns raised by various educational institutions and related associations had been “addressed” by the bill and the committee review process.
Universities have strongly opposed several provisions of the various vintages of the Patent Reform Act…so an impression that their concerns had been “addressed” could cause one to believe that the legislation was a step or two closer to significant movement.
Not so fast, though. Turns out the CPF memorandum was not, um, blessed by any single university or association.
A call-to-action alert from the National Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges aimed to set the record straight:
“The briefing paper implies that all of the university community’s concerns with S. 1145, the Patent Reform Act of 2007, have been addressed. CPF’s assertion is factually incorrect and misrepresents the position of the university community and individual institutions on patent reform legislation.”
Looks like there’s no harm from the gaffe, though…CPF claims it didn’t intend to suggest that the heavy lifting was done, and the Association of American Universities acknowledged that several important changes that address university concerns have been made to the bill.
