Darrell Issa May Revive Controversial Patent-Troll Measure

The new chairman of the House’s intellectual-property subcommittee likes the Innovation Act—but that doesn’t mean he won’t try to change it.

Issa: Continues gun-running probe.
National Journal
Dustin Volz
Add to Briefcase
Dustin Volz
Feb. 5, 2015, 9:25 a.m.

As Cap­it­ol Hill braces for an­oth­er round of pat­ent-re­form de­bates, Rep. Dar­rell Issa won’t rule out bring­ing back a con­ten­tious pro­vi­sion that was left on the cut­ting-room floor in the last Con­gress.

Issa, who now wields the gavel on the House Ju­di­ciary Com­mit­tee’s Courts, in­tel­lec­tu­al Prop­erty, and In­ter­net Sub­com­mit­tee, is one of 19 ori­gin­al co­spon­sors signed on to the In­nov­a­tion Act, a pat­ent-re­form bill that was in­tro­duced Thursday.

But while the Cali­for­nia Re­pub­lic­an said he fully backs the bill, he also said he would still look for areas to im­prove it — an ef­fort that could in­clude re­viv­ing lan­guage that would ex­pand the U.S. Pat­ent and Trade­mark Of­fice’s abil­ity to re­ject low-qual­ity pat­ents.

“One of the hear­ings that I’ve tent­at­ively sched­uled — and we’ll hold that be­fore the markup — will be on the ef­fect­ive­ness of the cur­rent law,” Issa told Na­tion­al Journ­al, re­fer­ring to a hear­ing he plans to hold next week. “I’m go­ing to use the hear­ing pro­cess to fur­ther people’s un­der­stand­ing, and that’s when we’ll fig­ure it out.”

Issa, him­self a pat­ent-hold­er, pushed to in­clude lan­guage in the In­nov­a­tion Act last Con­gress that would have broadened the “covered busi­ness meth­od” re­view pro­gram to in­clude soft­ware pat­ents. Cur­rent law, en­shrined in the 2011 Amer­ica In­vents Act, al­lows only non-tech­no­lo­gic­al fin­an­cial-ser­vices pat­ents to be eli­gible for the audit.

But a num­ber of blue-chip tech com­pan­ies, in­clud­ing IBM and Mi­crosoft, waged a full-throated cam­paign against Issa’a pro­pos­al, which was also strongly backed by Demo­crat­ic Sen. Chuck Schu­mer. They warned that rais­ing the bar too high for soft­ware pat­ents would kill Amer­ic­an in­nov­a­tion, and they vowed to drop sup­port for the In­nov­a­tion Act un­less the “pois­on pill” was scrubbed.

The gam­bit worked, and the meas­ure was dropped, clear­ing the way for the House’s pas­sage of the In­nov­a­tion Act on a 325-91 vote. The ver­sion re­in­tro­duced Thursday is the same as the one that cleared the cham­ber last time.

Some of the most ar­dent pro-re­form stake­hold­ers, in­clud­ing those rep­res­ent­ing the tech start-up scene, have said that ex­pand­ing the re­view pro­gram to in­clude soft­ware pat­ents is the most im­port­ant thing Con­gress can do to stem the tide of pat­ent trolling — the act of stock­pil­ing pat­ents in or­der to use them to leach money from in­vent­ors by threat­en­ing in­fringe­ment suits. The oth­er re­forms, they ar­gue, won’t be as ef­fect­ive in cur­tail­ing pred­at­ory pat­ent lit­ig­a­tion.

The idea ul­ti­mately proved too tox­ic for House Ju­di­ciary Chair­man Bob Good­latte, who shelved it dur­ing the markup pro­cess. Now, even some back­ers of the pro­vi­sion warn that it’s not worth the firestorm that would erupt if it’s brought up again.

“I’m al­most re­luct­ant for it to come back, be­cause it just cre­ated such a big dis­trac­tion,” one pro-re­form ad­voc­ate said. “To be hon­est, I don’t think it’s got the sup­port in the Sen­ate.”

Asked spe­cific­ally about the pro­spects for bring­ing covered busi­ness meth­od ex­pan­sion back, Good­latte on Thursday said he and his col­leagues were open to dis­cuss­ing any ideas on how to tinker with the In­nov­a­tion Act — but he quickly tempered that bon­homie.

“I wouldn’t de­clare any­thing dead,” Good­latte said dur­ing a press con­fer­ence re­in­tro­du­cing the In­nov­a­tion Act. “On the oth­er hand, we have a product that has been very care­fully honed,” and any new change “has to add to the large co­ali­tion we have, not take away from it.”

After Good­latte’s com­ments, Issa sug­ges­ted he might not seek an ex­pan­sion of the re­view pro­gram but in­stead pro­pose nar­row­er lan­guage that would merely ex­tend the length of it. Cur­rent law will have the re­view pro­gram sun­set in 2020.

“Ex­ten­sion is prob­ably a good com­prom­ise between killing it and ex­pand­ing it,” Issa said after the press con­fer­ence.

What We're Following See More »
JUST AS SENATE VOTES ITS DISAPPROVAL
Trump Backtracks on Putin's "Incredible Offer"
3 days ago
THE LATEST
ARMS CONTROL, SYRIA WERE DISCUSSED
Russians Refer to "Verbal Agreements" with Trump
3 days ago
THE LATEST

"Two days after President Trump’s summit with Russian President Vladi­mir Putin, Russian officials offered a string of assertions about what the two leaders had achieved. 'Important verbal agreements' were reached at the Helsinki meeting, Russia’s ambassador to the United States, Anatoly Antonov, told reporters in Moscow Wednesday, including preservation of the New Start and INF agreements," and cooperation in Syria.

Source:
WAS "GRUDGINGLY" CONVINCED
Trump Was Shown Proof of Russian Interference Before Inauguration
3 days ago
THE LATEST

"Two weeks before his inauguration, Donald J. Trump was shown highly classified intelligence indicating that President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia had personally ordered complex cyberattacks to sway the 2016 American election. The evidence included texts and emails from Russian military officers and information gleaned from a top-secret source close to Mr. Putin, who had described to the C.I.A. how the Kremlin decided to execute its campaign of hacking and disinformation. Mr. Trump sounded grudgingly convinced, according to several people who attended the intelligence briefing. But ever since, Mr. Trump has tried to cloud the very clear findings that he received on Jan. 6, 2017, which his own intelligence leaders have unanimously endorsed."

TAKE THAT, HATERS
Trump: High IQ People Loved the Putin Meeting
4 days ago
THE LATEST
"POLICY DIFFERENCES DON'T MATTER"
Comey Says to Vote Democratic This Fall
4 days ago
THE LATEST
×
×

Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.

Login