- The increasing complexity of high-tech products and of scientific research may also be leading to problems. Firms often need to use large numbers of existing patents to develop a new product. They may find themselves having to negotiate complex licensing agreements, often with multiple rights-holders holding overlapping patents, in order to emerge from so-called “patent thickets”. Delays in patents being granted can also lead to new products inadvertently infringing on patents issued after these products were brought to market. These problems are at their most extreme in high-tech industries such as computing and telecoms because of the complex and fast moving nature of the innovations concerned and the need to set formal technological standards and ensure interoperability.
Gowers Review of Intellectual PropertyAt the Enterprise Conference on 2 December 2005, the Chancellor of the Exchequer announced that, as part of the Pre-Budget Report 2005 package, he was asking Andrew Gowers to lead an Independent Review to examine the UK's intellectual property framework. The Open Rights Group has been formally invited to participate. We are currently drafting our submission and wish to include your thoughts and opinions. We have reproduced the Call for Evidence below and invite you to contribute - just hit 'respond' next to the paragraph you wish to comment on. Many of the questions asked by Andrew Gowers in this review are very focused, but you should feel free to comment on the issues and the wider implications rather than feel obliged to provide specific answers. If you want to talk about issues not raised by this call for evidence, please do - just leave your comments on the Introduction. |
this site was built by Open Rights Group based on a template by 
|
||
|
|
|||
|
|
|
March 14th, 2006 at 17:36
Can IP law ever keep up with technological changes. Should it even try?
April 18th, 2006 at 18:50
The increasing complexity of high-tech products and of scientific research may also be leading to problems. Firms often need to use large numbers of existing patents to develop a new product. They may find themselves having to negotiate complex licensing agreements, often with multiple rights-holders holding overlapping patents, in order to emerge from so-called “patent thickets”. Delays in patents being granted can also lead to new products inadvertently infringing on patents issued after these products were brought to market. These problems are at their most extreme in high-tech industries such as computing and telecoms because of the complex and fast moving nature of the innovations concerned and the need to set formal technological standards and ensure interoperability.
Err, quite!
So, in the case of small companies / ad-hoc collectives (e.g., sourceforge.net) / individuals creating innovative high-tech software solutions (c.f., BIND, DNS, Sendmail, Apache, Linux, Firefox, GIMP etc.) how the hell are we to develop stuff without having to spend 99% of our time wading through dubiously granted patents?
April 21st, 2006 at 14:44
With embedded software, items are comeing onto the market which if patents are given will severely restrict others from using those products or developing new ones.
This applies mainly to software patents as old products die out and are replaced with software embedde funtionality then unless licensed these products will be restricted and cost more.