A new bill in Congress could bring the US in line with the patent systems of other countries. If the Patent Reform Act of 2007 passes, then the US will cease to be a first-to-invent patent system and will become a first-to-file system like most of the other countries in the world.
Joanne Irene Gabrynowicz of the Res Communis blog gave the following summary of the differences between the two patent systems in a post entitled, Filing First, Not Inventing, May Be More Important For Securing Space Intellectual Property:
When it comes to recognizing a creator’s right to a patent, most of the world has adopted the “first-to-file” rule. This means that the person or entity that files the patent first, is granted the patent without having to prove that they were the first to actually invent it. It was, as a former law school professor of mine used to say, “a race to the patent office door.” On the other hand, the United States has abided by the “first-to-invent” rule. This means that the patent applicant has to prove that it was he/she/it that was the first to invent the patentable item by being the first to reduce the patent’s underlying idea to a practice. Generally speaking, the first-to-file rule appeals to those who value efficiency in the often long patenting process. While those who value equity are proponents of the first-to-invent rule which seeks to reward the labor of the inventor.
Her post is an excellent read, and it briefly points out some of the implications the passage of this bill could have on space law and the general US practice of IP.
It seems to me that switching from a first-to-invent to a first-to-file patent system is like the US switching to the metric system. However, switching patent systems could have far greater implications than merely streamlining the systems between countries. It becomes a question of who should be rewarded? The first to invent or the first to get his patent to the trademark office? Apparently, the rest of the world appreciates efficiency over equity.
Comments