From the US based, Innovation Alliance Website:
Thus far , no "Foreign based"
members ...
http://innovationalliance.net/about/about-us
http://innovationalliance.net/our-principles
An Innovation Ecosystem Drives the American Economy
Our nation’s economic strength is dependent upon a thriving community of research institutions, entrepreneurial companies of all sizes, and venture capital firms interacting together. To support this innovation ecosystem, we must maintain a patent system that protects both emerging companies, whose business models are patent dependent and focus on developing inventions that enable new products and services but don’t engage in manufacturing, and larger organizations that seek relief from frivolous litigation.
Patent Reform Must be Targeted and Balanced for the Innovation Ecosystem to Thrive
Maintaining a strong patent system that supports innovative enterprises of all sizes and business models requires targeted, balanced reform as opposed to the massive restructuring of a functioning system that has served us well for decades. Changes to our patent laws should be narrowly focused on:
Improving patent quality;Enhancing certainty ; and
Preserving market-based valuations of patents.
Patent reform measures should not disadvantage emerging, pro-innovation, patent-dependent businesses and their surrounding ecosystem.
Patent Reform Should Focus on Improved Patent Quality
The patent system is not fundamentally broken or in need of sweeping reform but can and should be improved through a legislative focus on improving patent quality. Frivolous litigation can be reduced through improving patent quality by:
Fully funding the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO);
Allowing the USPTO to retain all of its user fees;
Encouraging the USPTO to invest in additional human and other resources; and
Revising metrics for USPTO examiners’ compensation to encourage and reward quality of examination, not quantity of applications reviewed.
The Current Law Regarding the Determination of a Patent’s Value is Appropriate
Existing law concerning the determination of a patent’s value and calculation of damages when a patent has been infringed provides courts appropriate flexibility to reach a fair conclusion on damages assessment. Maintaining that flexibility is critical for small companies and licensors to be able to protect their patents against larger, well-financed competitors.
Creating an Administrative Post-Grant Opposition Procedure Would Add Uncertainty and Bureaucracy
The creation of a broad post-grant opposition procedure would lead to greater bureaucracy, less certainty, further delay in securing a valid patent, and expose emerging companies to unmeritorious or commercially motivated challenges by deep-pocketed rivals.
Inventors Must Continue to Have the Ability to Amend Pending Patent Applications
Proposals to limit the ability of applicants to amend pending patent applications (continuation applications) are overly restrictive, disadvantage smaller innovators, and may result in increased litigation.
The Key is Vigorous Pre-Grant Review, Not Sweeping Litigation Alteration
Fundamental alteration of litigation practice can have a tremendous impact on thinly capitalized, emerging companies that have fueled the nation’s economic growth and which – across industries – rely heavily on intellectual property rights to attract venture capital, grow businesses and enter markets dominated by large players. A patent process that focuses on rigorous review prior to the granting of an application will better limit patent abuse than extensive litigation reform that could inadvertently disadvantage new market entrants and innovators. |
