A Sad Situation on Edge

This morning my email contained a communique from USPTO on their latest technology issue. It seems that EFS-Web won't work with Windows 10 and its new Edge browser.

Because their authentication requires Java, their friendly vendor, Oracle, recommends using a different browser - Firefox (ok) or IE (noooooo).  No Chrome, no Opera. Definitely not Tor. The good part of this is that lawyers tend to not be very early adopters of new operating systems and a lot of folks are Apple fan girls and fan boys. So for a lot of folks this won't be an issue until it's time for the corporate IT people to do a desk drop of a new laptop.  But still. IP intense firms and more important small, young innovative companies are supposed to hold off in upgrading their tech because USPTO can't keep their tech fresh. 

USPTO needs to keep its tech up to date and at the same version as their stakeholders (queue the guy on the hunt for a vampire.). Enough with the patent listening tours. Spend the money in tech.

Here's what The Office had to say,

Windows 10/Microsoft Edge: Compatibility Issue for EFS-Web and Private PAIR Authentication

For users who are updating their operating systems to Windows 10, please be aware that Windows 10 comes installed with a new web browser, Microsoft Edge, that does not support plug-ins and will not run Java. Because Java is required for authentication to EFS-Web and Private PAIR, this impacts your ability to access EFS-Web and Private PAIR via Microsoft Edge.

To access EFS-Web and Private PAIR using Windows 10, Oracle is recommending the use of alternative browsers such as Firefox and Internet Explorer. IE11 will also be available on Windows10. For additional information regarding Java compatibility and instructions on how to access IE11 on Windows 10, please visit:http://www.java.com/en/download/faq/win10_faq.xml

The USPTO is working on a longer term plan to improve the overall authentication process. For USPTO updates regarding this issue please visit either of our Announcements pages:

• EFS – Web Announcements:http://www.uspto.gov/patents-application-process/applying-online/efs-web-announcements

• PAIR Announcements:http://www.uspto.gov/patents-application-process/checking-application-status/pair-announcements

If you need assistance with this matter, or have questions on any eFiling topic, please visit the Patent Electronic Business Center webpage:http://www.uspto.gov/learning-and-resources/support-centers/patent-electronic-business-center for comprehensive contact information, FAQ’s, and other eFiling resources.

Corrections Conundrum

8,800 And Counting...

Corrections total 8,800 year–to–date. USPTO added another 623 new corrections this week. So we're up to 8,800 corrections this year that the Average Citizen wouldn't know to look for when using the patent search tools available to the public.

No one bothers to correct patents that are abandoned or aren't perceived as having value.  Why waste your time.

Most of the corrections are on patents that are not new, have paid maintenance fees, and are in interesting scientific and technical domains where new innovation are emerging. Corrections are an indicator that patents are in play.  We did a quick analysis of corrections in August.  This review revealed that patents related to internet connected vehicle control systems were having every i dotted and every t crossed.  When you look carefully, the corrections point to a portfolio building effort and clean-up action before a monetization effort we suspect.

But here's the rub.  The corrections are an undercover action generally unknown to most people who aren't patentistas.  All the corrections of colons and semi-colons is lovely but it's the one where the change says that dependent claim 17 really should be pointing to claim 5 and not claim 1, fundamentally changing the public presentation of what the invention was all about. That are troubling.  These changes are only available in non-text accessible old school image format with only some of the pages in the USPTO full-text database pointing the user to images. This stuff is torture.

Especially when you consider the logic which goes like this:

1) Patent owner sends in a digital form requesting the change.
2) It floats all around USPTO to get approved.
3) USPTO types up the change language and have the Director sign it (our guess is this is done with the magic automated pen but maybe not which would be even more ridiculous.)
4) Then someone at USPTO creates an image of the change and adds it to the image version of the patent.

Something's gotta give here.

Check out this week's Box Scores here.

Innovation Business Intelligence

Patents and published patent applications are one of the only publicly available sources of concise scientific information on the output of research and development, the potential use of the inventions, and new product design features. 

If you want to have a deep understanding of the direction of science, technology, and engineering, read patents.  If you don't want to read all of the arcane patent, try the way we read patents to see what they are about.  You don't have to read all of the details to understand the essence of a new invention and where it fits into the world of innovation.  

Each week we publish weekly state-by-state digests about all of the new patents granted that week, the inventors responsible for them...all of the inventors not just the first named inventor on a patent.  This will help you know when local companies and inventors are granted patents. It will help you know which companies are local and which companies are around the company that are working with local inventors.  

So what do you do with this information?  Find investment and partnership opportunities. Know what is happening in your technology parks. Understand the science and technology behind new university spin-outs and start-ups. Work with companies building new products to focus on new STEM job creation and enhance workforce development. Use the Coming Soon™ navigation map to see what's happening and reach out, recruit, retain, and grow.

If you want to know what innovation is coming soon....read patents.  It's not as bad as you think.

Scientific Presence - The Resources for Innovation

Scientific Presence Profiles

Scientific presence is the holistic view of the science and technology infrastructure that drives invention, patents, innovation, emerging new markets, new businesses and economic growth.

Each Scientific Presence Profile assembles a comprehensive set of inventive, demographic, economic, and business intelligence data about activity in a State. Easy navigation and ranking information enables side-by-side comparison of profiles. The easy to use charts, tables, and score cards present a picture of inventive and innovative trends, where R&D funding is coming from and what it is being spent on and which higher education institutions and research labs are benefitting from the funding. Demographic information helps identify talent pools and the depth of scientific, technical and engineering in the community.

A Deep Dive Into the Data

Way Better Patents continuously monitors the best research and important data sources on the innovation economy. Way Better Patents scientific presence information lets us present a picture of emerging inventive and innovative trends, new and emerging markets and the nature of R&D efforts. We take a deep dive to find the best data to deliver subscribers one comprehensive source of scientific presence information so they have deeper insight into the indicia of future economic and market growth in today's innovation economy.



Check out the Scientific Presence Profiles for each state by starting here.

Out of Africa

I spent some time recently at a Collaborate event for inventors, makers, and investors. It featured many fascinating speakers from across the spectrum of innovative talent. 

Among the speakers was Josh Mandell from the Commerce Dept. who was evangelizing on how start-ups need to think globally from their beginnings, when they are nascent inventors figuring out where they want to go. 

A woman stood up to raise some points on going global. She wanted to talk about diversity among innovators. 

After a morning of diversity discussions focused on making women feel more welcome in tech land by calling in them first in meetings. (Really!)  I was preparing to pack up and leave when this woman raised a fascinating point. How about geographic diversity in immigration programs focused on bringing engineers and scientists to the US. She asked why there wasn't more diversity in the Visas so more talented people from Africa could come to the US. 

This was the best diversity question asked all day. We need more innovators and inventors out of Africa. 

This Week's Patent Box Score

Way Better Patents has been busy working on improving our weekly databank, looking at ways to make information about patents more accessible, and examining the flow of information based inventions — business methods patents, patents for internet and communications technology, social media, business methods inventive elements embedded in other domains.  This week there are 59 new patents that have classifications in the business methods area indicating that the patent examiner believes that certain elements of the patent are like those contained in patents whose main classifications are in business methods, Data processing: financial, business practice, management, or cost/price determination.  Informationization of innovation continues.  Here is a quick look at what's going on this week.  

Explore this week's patent Box Scores at Way Better Patents

Score Card — September 10, 2013

Total: 6,173
New Grants^*: 6,157
^*New Utility, Design, & Plant Patents
US Grants: 2,967
Foreign Grants: 3,206
Named Inventors: 16,438

This Week's Score Card by Domain

Domain	This Week	Year To Date
Utility	5,727	191,840
Chemical	1,095	36,869
Electrical	3,115	103,480
Mechanical	1,517	51,491
Design	410	16,318
Plant	20	614
Reexam	17	581
Reissue	16	611
Errata	41	1,420
Corrections	443	16,440
Business Methods	128	3,890
Broad Business Methods	459	15,212

Databank Sitemap

Compact Databank View →
Weekly Databank →

Global Indicators

Summary of this week's patent grants to first–named inventors from non–US locations excluding the US.

Region	Count
Africa	5
Asia	1,945
Central America & Caribbean	1
Europe	961
Middle East	85
North America	139
Oceania/Australia	57
Russian Federation	5
South America	8
Total	3,206

Compact Databank View at Way Better Patents →

Weekly Databank at Way Better Patents →

Business Methods Watch

See the weekly business methods patents weekly databank for the details.

As of September 10, 2013 USPTO has granted 128 new business methods patents with a total of 3,890 year to date. More broad business methods patents this week came in at 459 and 15,212 year to date. This week there were also 59 patents that had a cross-reference (XR) classification in class 705 indicating that the invention has business methods elements embodied in the inventions it covers.
Business methods patents include only those patents with an original classification in business method classes. It does not include other inventions where USPTO has identified other features that are business methods related (patents with discretionary classifications in the business methods domain.)

Business Methods Databank →

Sign Up To Have the Way Better Patents Score Card delivered directly to your email box each week!!

Answers to Some Basic Questions

A reader posed some basic questions in response to our "Commercialization Conundrum" post. The questions and our replies follow.

What is a US Patent?

A patent is a property right that grants an inventor exclusive rights to use/sell/manufacture their invention for a specified period of time in exchange for “teaching” others about his invention and how it works.

A patent is obtained by filing a patent application with the United States Patent and Trademark Office which outlines the specific guidelines determining what is patentable in the US.  (See Way Better Patents' Glossary for more info.)

A patent obtained in another country?

A patent obtained in a foreign country protects the inventor’s intellectual property (the invention) in that country).  It protects against an American inventor importing products that infringe the patent into that country.

But, there's more...

A US patent prevents a foreign manufacturer from importing products into the US that infringe a US patent.  But, the inventor/patent holder needs to enforce the patent without the help of the USPTO.  The USPTO gives you the patent, you have to enforce it yourself (or with the support of top notch IP attorneys.)

What rights do patents provide for the patent holder?

The patent holder is entitled to exclusive use of their invention.  The right conferred by the patent grant is, in the language of the statute (patent laws - this is what it means when patent lawyers say stuff like, "It's statutory.") and the language of the patent itself, "the right to exclude others from making, using, offering for sale, or selling" the invention in the United States or "importing" the invention into the United States.

What does a patent applicant give up to obtains these rights?

A patent holder gives up the rights to keep details of the invention secret.  The inventor receives a patent in exchange for disclosing how the invention works or what it does. Basically the inventor publicly discloses how an invention works (aka - teaches) and gets exclusive rights to use/sell/manufacture your invention for 20 years after the filing date of your patent application (the current term).

Is it really worth getting and defending a patent? Coca Cola, arguably one of the most successful businesses in the world, appears to value trade secrets more that certain patents. But they also vigorously protect their trademark.

Patents and trademarks - the intellectual property equivalent of apples and oranges - event though Apple has lots of both, but we digress.

Patents are good for some things, trade secrets are good for others, trademarks are totally different but are intellectual property too.

• See the work of Thomas Edison, original patent troll, and Nikola Tesla inventor of Alternating Current.  Both guys had patents but had different strategies.
• Ask Mr. Bezos how much money Amazon is making from Barnes and Noble and others for licensing fees related to the single action ordering system patent US Patent 5,960,411  (We'll discuss the reexamination where on-demand purchases using your cable TV remote control resulted in big changes to the claims in one-click land.)
• And for Elias Howe the sewing machine business was pretty good.  It took a five year patent battle but eventually his invention was declared "basic"  (essential or seminal in today's patent lingo) and Mr. Howe was awarded a royalty for every machine that infringed his patent. Patent wars are not new they are just more public thanks to the internet.  The sewing machine war is pretty interesting though.
• The late An Wang sold his patent for core memory to IBM to raise money forhis firm and then WANG Laboratories changed the way we create documents and worked in an office forever.  WANG Laboratories invented the technology for Object Linking and Embedding (OLE) which it sold to Microsoft in exchange for a $90M investment.  All this internet stuff with pictures with links is OLE on steroids.
• If Coca-Cola had a patent strategy instead of a trade secret strategy the company wouldn’t have its $167 billion market capitalization and we’d all be drinking “coke” with labels that say Walmart, Stop & Shop, or Mom's Kitchen. Much of Coke's value is in it's branding which protects with its trademarks.  By the way, one part of the formula is out there.  Since high fructose corn syrup, one of the ingredients in Coke, is a grain product by Kosher standards, regular Coke isn't kosher for Passover.  But, Coke replaces the high fructose corn syrup with cane sugar during Passover.  Lots of folks buy Coke by the case at that time of year because a lot of health nuts (in addition to Passover celebrants) prefer cane sugar in their soda.
• It’s just like the recipe for Oreos. Nabisco, a division of Kraft Food is celebrating the 100th anniversary of their product this year. If they had patented the recipe rather than keeping it as a trade secret, they wouldn’t be making billions selling them since every Tom, Dick and Harry could copy the recipe.  

But just because it's in the patent doesn't mean it works.  Negative know-how (trade secrets that define what doesn’t work) also enters ino this equation. See our earlier post on Tabasco and the Extra Ingredient. Sometimes the patent isn’t always a complete view of the invention, but we may not know it at the time.

Keep the questions coming.

The Sometimes Inscrutable Patent Argot

The Bioluminescent Novelty Device

Patent Argot — the strange vocabulary of patents — is the specialized idiomatic vocabulary that is peculiar to the patentsphere.

 "Argot" a special language, especially that of an underworld group, devised for private communication and identification; a language with its own style, grammar, and vocabulary."

(The underworld part is from the dictionary) 

Inventions have always created new vocabulary. 
Creating new words to describe inventions has been around for as long as man has been inventing things. In the 1500s, Leonardo Da Vinci created his own words for his inventions. Da Vinci's first flying machine was defined as the "ornithopter" — ornithos for bird and pteron for wing. In 1863, Ponton D'Amecourt invented the term helicopter to define his flying machine — "helico" spiral - "pter" for wings. A contemporary version of these inventions is the VTOL — the Vertical Take Off and Landing vehicle.

USPTO's Patent Argot — A Glossary of Terms from the USPC
Way Better Patents has assembled a master glossary of all of the definitions contained in the US Patent Classification System in alphabetical order along with the USPC Class from which the definition is drawn. This enables you to look up the USPTO meaning of words and terms of art based on the scientific or technical domain from which the definition came — definitions in context. This will help you understand how particular words are used relative to the specific types of inventions and patents.

Patent Argot and Patent Crafting and The Patentsphere
Inventors need to craft language that is as broad as possible so that their patent explains something previously unknown while at the same time providing vocabulary that can reach into the future to cover things not yet invented. Fuzzy boundaries on an current invention help a patent be more flexible. Inventors have defined Portable Law Enforcement Data Processing Devices (handheld parking ticket issuing devices), Single Action Ordering System (one click purchases - see Amazon and iTunes) and Social Expression Communications (greeting cards).

On a nice day in the patentsphere you let your kids play with the Bioluminescent Novelty Device.

An Impenetrable Wall
Patent argot creates an impenetrable wall between you and the patents that you care about. It can be what keeps you from finding what you are looking for; why you are never quite sure if your freedom to operate report covered all the right stuff; and what drives that strange feeling you get when you've read a patent and but have no idea what it says. (Have you ever heard someone say "preferred embodiment" in real life?) Way Better Patetns is hoping to help fix that problem.

To use the glossary start here.

Patent It Yourself - A Self-Help Book

We'd like to believe that you can get all of the information you need from the internet and from the vast array of information on the USPTO website.  Sadly, it doesn't work that way.  When you've worn yourself out clicking on links and reach the point where you want to smash your computer to bits, it's time for a real book.  Even as patent nerds ourself, we often find ourselves reaching for this trusty little tome to get a quick answer about the basic mechanics of creating a patent application - hence it's inclusion on the Way Better Patents Reading List.  Even if you are working with a patent agent or attorney, this book will help you speak their language.



Patent It Yourself: Your Step-by-Step Guide to Filing at the U.S. Patent Office by David Pressman — The handbook to turn to when you are tired of mousing around the USPTO web site or in need of relief from patent attorney speak on how to get a patent.

Government Interest Statements for September 13, 2012

Each week Way Better Patents publishes a list of the latest patents and patent applications that contain Government Interest Statements or include a Joint Research Agreement (JRA) statement.  The list includes the patent information, the assignees, the funding agency, and the actual statement which usually includes the contract numbers for federally funded research efforts.  The JRA statement usually identifies the parties working together on the intellectual property.  

Here is a summary of published patent applications that contain a government interest statement or a joint research agreement statements for September 13, 2012. 

Agencies

51	Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)
28	Department of Defense (DOD)
18	Department of Energy (DOE)
12	National Science Foundation (NSF)
6	Small Business Administration (SBA)
3	National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)
3	National Security Agency (NSA)
1	Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA)
1	Department of Agriculture (USDA)

The published patents cover the following scientific and technical domains within the US Patent Classification System.  Each class has a link to the definition at USPTO.

Government Interest - U.S. Classification

21	(424)	Drug, bio-affecting and body treating compositions
16	(514)	Drug, bio-affecting and body treating compositions
10	(435)	Chemistry: molecular biology and microbiology
4	(257)	Active solid-state devices
4	(348)	Television
3	(073)	Measuring and testing
3	(239)	Fluid sprinkling, spraying, and diffusing
3	(250)	Radiant energy
3	(604)	Surgery
2	(204)	Chemistry: electrical and wave energy
2	(307)	Electrical transmission or interconnection systems
2	(428)	Stock material or miscellaneous articles
2	(429)	Chemistry: electrical current producing apparatus, product, and process
2	(506)	Combinatorial chemistry technology: method, library, apparatus
2	(700)	Data processing: generic control systems or specific applications
2	(717)	Data processing: software development, installation, and management

Following is the geographic breakdown of the first named inventors on the patents:

Country

111	United States of America
1	Canada
1	China PRC
1	United Kingdom

US State

18	California
9	Massachusetts
9	Texas
7	Maryland
5	Illinois
5	New York
4	Florida
4	Indiana
4	North Carolina
4	New Mexico
4	Tennessee
4	Virginia
3	Connecticut
3	Michigan
2	Arkansas
2	Arizona
2	Georgia
2	Minnesota
2	Mississippi
2	New Jersey
2	Washington
2	Wisconsin

Government Interest Statements - September 18, 2012

Each week Way Better Patents publishes a list of the latest patents and patent applications that contain Government Interest Statements or include a Joint Research Agreement (JRA) statement.  The list includes the patent information, the assignees, the funding agency, and the actual statement which usually includes the contract numbers for federally funded research efforts.  The JRA statement usually identifies the parties working together on the intellectual property.  

Here is a summary of granted patents that contain a government interest statement or a joint research agreement statements for September 18th, 2012.  

Patents with Government Interest Statements — September 18, 2012

Weekly Summary — Federal Entity

Government Interest - U.S. Federal

42	Department of Defense (DOD)
41	Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)
26	Department of Energy (DOE)
13	National Science Foundation (NSF)
3	Department of Commerce (DOC)
2	National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)
2	Small Business Administration (SBA)
1	Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA)
1	Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
1	National Security Agency (NSA)
1	Department of Agriculture (USDA)

Subject Matter of Government Interest Patents

13	435	Chemistry: molecular biology and microbiology
12	514	Drug, bio-affecting and body treating compositions
8	424	Drug, bio-affecting and body treating compositions
7	250	Radiant energy
5	257	Active solid-state devices
4	436	Chemistry: analytical and immunological testing
3	089	Ordnance
3	324	Electricity: measuring and testing
3	356	Optics: measuring and testing
3	385	Optical waveguides
3	427	Coating processes
3	540	Organic compounds
3	700	Data processing: generic control systems or specific applications
3	702	Data processing: measuring, calibrating, or testing
2	052	Static structures
2	073	Measuring and testing
2	264	Plastic and nonmetallic article shaping or treating: processes
2	370	Multiplex communications
2	375	Pulse or digital communications
2	423	Chemistry of inorganic compounds
2	600	Surgery
2	607	Surgery: light, thermal, and electrical application
2	706	Data processing: artificial intelligence
2	707	Data processing: database and file management or data structures

This Week's Patents

This week Government Interest patent grants were granted to 132 US inventors, two (2) from the United Kingdom, and one (1) from Switzerland. Inventors are identified based on the residence identify of the first named inventor. The breakdown of the States of residence of the US Inventors is:

• 31    California
• 10    Florida
•   9    New York
•   9    Wisconsin
•   8    Maryland
•   7    Massachusetts
•   5    Washington
•   4    New Mexico
•   4    Texas
•   3    Colorado
•   3    Michigan
•   3    North Carolina
•   3    Pennsylvania
•   2    Arizona
•   2    Connecticut
•   2    Idaho
•   2    Illinois
•   2    Indiana
•   2    Kansas
•   2    Kentucky
•   2    Mississippi
•   2    Nebraska
•   2    New Jersey
•   2    Ohio

Government Interest Statements for September 11, 2012

Each week Way Better Patents publishes a list of the latest patents and patent applications that contain Government Interest Statements or include a Joint Research Agreement (JRA) statement.  The list includes the patent information, the assignees, the funding agency, and the actual statement which usually includes the contract numbers for federally funded research efforts.  The JRA statement usually identifies the parties working together on the intellectual property.  

Here is a summary of granted patents that contain a government interest statement or a joint research agreement statements for September 11th, 2012.  

46	Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)
35	Department of Defense (DOD)
21	Department of Energy (DOE)
18	National Science Foundation (NSF)
3	National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)
3	Small Business Administration (SBA)
1	Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
1	Department of the Interior (DOI)
1	Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
1	General Services Administration (GSA)
1	Library of Congress (LOC)
1	National Security Agency (NSA)
1	Department of Agriculture (USDA)

118	United States of America
2	Canada
2	India
1	Israel

23	California
9	New York
9	Pennsylvania
7	New Mexico
5	Illinois
5	Texas
4	Indiana
4	Massachusetts
4	Maryland
4	Michigan
3	New Jersey
3	Ohio
3	South Carolina
3	Tennessee
3	Utah
3	Virginia
3	Washington
2	Alabama
2	Arizona
2	Connecticut
2	North Carolina
2	Nebraska
2	Oregon
2	Wisconsin
1	Arkansas
1	District of Columbia
1	Florida
1	Georgia
1	Hawaii
1	Idaho
1	Kansas
1	Minnesota
1	Missouri

Gridlock -- Not on the Beltway This Time

Understanding all of the ins and outs of intellectual property and the whole idea that an invention is property can make your head hurt.  It's one of those esoteric tasks that has been left to the patent cognoscenti for a very long time.  The down side of the, "let us worry about this" approach to intellectual property offered by many patent professionals is that the average entrepreneur, business owner, investor, and product manager is left scratching their collective heads after they've spent a lot of money and the cease and desist letter shows up anyway.

The Grid Lock Economy presents an engaging and compelling look at the politics and reality of intellectual property as an asset and the challenges this causes for innovators, inventors, the economy, and a host of other issues.  This book provides food for thought to help the rest of us understand why intellectual property issues are so daunting.  This is the latest entry from the Way Better Patents Reading List.



The Grid Lock Economy: How Too Much Ownership Wrecks Markets, Stops Innovation, and Costs Lives by Michael Heller — Patent thickets, the tragedy of the commons, and hard issues in intellectual property and the politics of ownership.

(We have added the link to Amazon for two reasons.  First, we thought the covers were interesting and fun to look at and second, if you follow the link and buy the book Amazon throws us some change which helps us keep our product pricing low.)

Government Interest Statements September 4th

Each week Way Better Patents publishes a list of the latest patents and patent applications that contain Government Interest Statements or include a Joint Research Agreement (JRA) statement.  The list includes the patent information, the assignees, the funding agency, and the actual statement which usually includes the contract numbers for federally funded research efforts.  The JRA statement usually identifies the parties working together on the intellectual property.

Here is a summary of granted patents that contain a government interest statement or a joint research agreement statements for September 4th, 2012.

41		Department of Defense (DOD)
30		Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)
28		Department of Energy (DOE)
13		National Science Foundation (NSF)
10		National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)
3		Department of Commerce (DOC)
2		Department of Agriculture (USDA)
1		Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
1		Department of Justice (DOJ)
1		Department of State (DOS)
1		National Geospatial Intelligence Agency (NGA)
1		National Security Agency (NSA)

Robo Caller Revenge

In the season of issues, compelling public debates, and political activism we bring you the Grass Roots Edition.

Gone are the days of The Federalist Papers when Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay wrote essays about how the new government would operate and why this type of government was the best choice for the United States of America. Today's democracy is an incessant stream of digital messages and electronic discourse, talking heads and bleeding edge blogs. Information is being created with such speed it's hard to digest let alone think about the impact of the changes and issues on the table today. If Congress was forced to write the bills by hand I doubt there would be any bills that were 2,000 pages long, but I digress.

The Congressional Management Foundation (CMF), is a nonpartisan nonprofit organization dedicated to promoting a more effective Congress and a group that clearly has their work cut out for them. It's report, "Communicating with Congress: How the Internat Has Changed Citizen Engagement" reports that in 2004 the Congress received 200 million communications from constituents - a four fold increase over the volume received in 1995. The increase was a direct result of internet-based communications. By 2008 they report that 44% of adults in America had contacted a Senator of Congressman in the last five years. 43% of those communications were via online methods.

91% people who contact Congress via the Internet cared deeply about the issue that triggered email. And they expected a reply. Only two-thirds actually got a response and most were dissatisfied with what they got. (Not surprising.) The form letter writing machine is alive and well up on Capitol Hill.

CMF's Beverly Bell presents the flip side in a letter to the Washington Post in which she notes that policy-makers in the Executive and Legislative Branches feel overwhelmed by citizen communications, and, because so much of it is identical, they find it increasingly difficult to manage and trust. Does this mean that basically they are ignoring constituent concerns? During the health care debate several Congressmen announced that they intended to vote the way they wanted even if it was against what their constituents wanted. How does advocacy work these days?

The election season is in full swing and it isn't even labor day yet.  Incessant advocacy Robo-calls from political luminaries across the political spectrum and the robo political survey, "say or hit 1 if you support..."  In the days leading up to the election the we will be bombarded. I was wondering how all this technology impacted the dynamics of the new digital citizenry and everything that goes with it. 

That brings us to patent 6,311,211 - Method and apparatus for delivering electronic advocacy messages. The patent, owned by Juno Online Services, presents a way to automate sending advocacy messages to your representatives. Sixty-three claims of reverse robocaller messaging bliss. The patent is describes an invention that is the Citizen's Revenge on the Robo-caller.

The inventors claim:
1. A method of operating an advocacy network, comprising the steps of:

accessing a user database, the user database comprising information about users and information identifying a representative associated with each user;

automatically selecting a user based on information in the user database; and

sending an advocacy message to the selected user through a first communication network.

So, they have your name in the database along with the names of your representatives. Then they have the capability to automatically send an advocacy message to your representatives.

Ok, now for the saturation elements...

Claim 6 adds...wherein the response message comprises one of an e-mail message, a facsimile message, a printed letter and a telephone call.

My problem with this claim is that it should say "where in the response message comprises ALL of the messages... an email, a fascimile (does anyone use those anymore) a printed letter and a telephone call.

Then there is the ability to send a message at a predetermined time.

Then add: the response message comprises a telephone call automatically established between the representative and the selected user.

Jackpot... but I wonder how long the person answering the phone will listen before hanging up?

Is Juno enforcing it's patents? Wouldn't that put a stop to all the Robocalls?

Getting to the Heart of the Matter

Intellectual Property: The Tough New Realities That Could Make or Break Your Business — Intellectual Property 101 — The latest Way Better Patents Good Read.

Intellectual property doesn't need to be scary - that's the whole foundation of Way Better Patents.  If people are going to spend millions and millions of dollars on patents and patent enforcement, and if patent news can more markets, mere mortals should be able to figure out what's going on.  We've had quite a few meetings that went something like this:

Enter business executive toting a big thick document stylishly bound in consultant-esque fashion.

Mr. or Ms. Executive slides the bulky document across the table and says, "I just paid $50,000 for this due diligence thing and I still don't understand if I can make and sell my product.  Why do I need to bother with this stuff anyway."

IP guru starts to explain how prior art and patents work and Mr. or Ms. Executives eyes roll back in their head while they reach for the Excedrin Migraine - that is if they can find it.  Fade to dark....

This book is the one you send Ms. or Mr. Executive home with so that they can come back with a reasonable understanding about what IP is all about and why they should care.  They might even acquire the vocabulary to keep up with their patent attorney and patent examiner.

The author, Paul Goldstein, is a law professor at Stanford Law and works counsel to Morrison & Foerster, he works on intellectual property litigation and transactions.  Who doesn't want to read a book by someone who works for a law firm with the nick name Mo Fo?


Intellectual Property: The Tough New Realities That Could Make or Break Your Business by Paul Goldstein — Stuff you need to know presented without the patent mumbo jumbo.

Please send us your good reads or comments on ours to feedback@waybetterpatents.com.


(We added the link to buy the books at Amazon for two reasons - the pictures of the covers look good and if you buy one of the books from the link on, Amazon pays us a little change.  This helps us keep our product cost low. ) 

Imagine - Your Brain, Your City, Your Crew

Insight and Thought Leadership or Liar, Liar, Pants on Fire

An entry from the Way Better Patents Reading List that has been pulled.

This post was written before it was revealed that Jonah Lehrer fabricated material in this book, notably quotes from Bob Dylan on how he created his music.  A July 30th story in the New York Times details how Mr. Lehrer fabricated the Dylan quotes and how he was exposed by Michael C. Moynihan in a Tablet article.  It calls into question the accuracy of the rest of the book.

We present our original review here.  Perhaps we were hoodwinked too.  The publisher has pulled the book off the shelves and is recalling it.  Time will tell if it resurfaces.  But in the meantime, here's what we originally wrote.  Amazon is in the process of pulling the book off its digital shelves as well.   If you get a question mark where the image goes, we will know the deed is done.

The original review.

This book may help you answer that important question, "Why didn't I think of that?"  This book is one of the best explorations of how people create things from the vantage point of how they think about them, what factors influence their thinking, and how who you hang out with can help drive your creativity.

Mr. Lehrer presents some interesting ways patents provide indicators that creativity is happening. And they are very revealing.  An analysis of patent citations reveals that "innovation was largely a local process, citations were ten times as likely to come from the same metropolitan area as a control patent."  Inventors are inspired by people in the 'hood.  And the best hoods for making this happen are the urban ones.  This is among the interesting information Mr. Lehrer presents.  (We aren't so sure about this one and are working to see if there is any truth on the citation front.)

Here the journalistic writing style makes even detailed information about neuroscience digestible and thought provoking.

Imagine by Jonah Lehrer — A great resource on understanding where ideas and creativity come from. Good insight on how patents point to good things happening. We were a bit put off by the hackneyed and unenlightened "fix the patent system" rhetoric without a plan at the conclusion of this book. (Note to self, write to Mr. Lehrer and see what his recommendations are.)