However, there is one area that I doubt will get much coverage: the nominee's positions on important intellectual-property issues, even though he is a former intellectual property litigator.

This oversight will not be surprising. Boards of directors follow in great detail the developments of international markets and changes in securities laws, but when it comes to detailing potential changes to patent law, the ratings are as bad as reruns of B movies. Nevertheless, the patent-reform bill working its way through Congress -- H.R. 2795 or "the Patent Reform Act of 2005" -- is a big deal.

Even for those who do not usually follow the play-by-play news on patent-law developments, this bill deserves close attention.

Fixing Systemic Problems

The patent-reform bill has several key elements designed to fix problems with the current patent system. In its current state, the reform bill reflects the input of many different interest groups. Smart businesses will keep an eye on these developments and be ready once the bill becomes law.

The changes likely will affect how a business plans for its own patent protections and responds to the patent assertions of others. Some of the key elements of the bill include changing to a first-to-file system, allowing for non-litigation post-grant reviews and shifting requirements for granting injunctions.

What makes these changes interesting is that there is no one-size-fits-all response. Some provisions will be welcomed by large companies, but not all large companies. Some provisions will be welcomed by biotech companies, but not electronics and software companies.

Many of the new bill's provisions are not liked by those who seek to profit off the loopholes in the system without providing any innovations of their own. But then these players do not have much sympathy among others providing input.

First-to-File System

Timing is always an issue with patent applications. The filing date is the dividing line between what other patents, publications and knowledge could be used against your application ("prior art") and what cannot be used (art dated after the filing date).

An earlier filing date usually is best, but under the current system one could invent something, even disclose it to the public and sell it (within a one-year limit) and still be able to file a patent application. However, with the change to a first-to-file system, the invention date does not matter, which means there will be more pressure to convert inventions into patent applications quickly. (continued...)

1  |  2  |  3  |  Next Page >