USPTO does Web 2.0 (and hilarious employee vid)

I invented Tuesday's IT Blogwatch: in which the US patent office creates a Digg for patent reviews. Not to mention the funniest employee orientation video ever...

Alan Sipress reports:

The [US] government is about to start opening up the process of reviewing patents to the modern font of wisdom: the Internet. The Patent and Trademark Office is starting a pilot project that will not only post patent applications on the Web and invite comments but also use a community rating system designed to push the most respected comments to the top of the file, for serious consideration by the agency's examiners.
...
It's quite a switch. For generations, the agency responsible for awarding patents, one of the cornerstones of innovation, has kept its distance from the very technological advances it has made possible ... Until now, patent examiners rarely sought outside opinions, instead relying on scientific writings and archived records of previous patents. For security reasons ... patent officials have at times even been barred from using the Internet for research.
...
The new patent system will try to help separate experts from posers by offering extensive details about the people sending information to the site ... the designers ... consulted some of the Internet's leading experts on reputation [including] Rob Malda, aka CmdrTaco, the founder of the popular technology Web site Slashdot.

Peter Lattman has more:

Last summer, New York Law School Professor Beth Noveck ... met with representatives at IBM, perenially the top recipient of U.S. patents. That meeting planted the seeds for the Community Patent Review project, a pilot program launching this spring by the U.S. PTO ... While the PTO currently allows some public comment, the new program promises to change the game ... But the program’s creators acknowledges to the Post that the system could have some kinks. With the stakes in the patent game high, there’s the potential for manipulation.

Mathew Ingram reminds us why this is important:

In the past, the problem (or at least one of them) has been that patent examiners are snowed under by applications and in many cases either don’t have the time or the expertise to ferret out evidence of “prior art,” which is patent lingo for an invention that is similar to the thing a person wants a patent for.

Aaron Bell elaborates:

According to the USPTO's own Annual Report, they received more than 615,300 patent related applications, which were dealt with by 4,883 examiners. A reasonable calculation then suggests that they would have to process the applications in an average of 15 hours each to keep up with demand.

In actuality, only 332,535 patents were disposed in FY2006, which means the backlog (already in excess of on million patent applications) only grew. In a system where your application is not likely to even be looked at for the first 22 months, and it takes more than 2.5 years for the average application to be processed, they are desperately in need of help examining.

And this anonymous poster claims to be a former patent examiner:

The vast majority (I'd say 98%) of patent apps are initially reviewed and rejected, but the attorney usually argues the rejection and/or adjusts the claims and sends the aplication back. So the examiner has to re-review the application, and this back-and-forth action often goes on for months or years ... So really, each examiner is looking at twice as many applications a week as you think they are.
...
When I worked there, it was pretty standard for patent examiners to work 10 hour days in addition to Saturdays or Sundays, and not get paid for the overtime.

Steven Hodson approves:

I may not be a big proponent of all things Web 2.0 but a new pilot project that was announced by the US Patent Office is to me a perfect use of the social network concept ... an over worked agency that is so important can now draw upon some of the best minds to help validate the ideas and concepts of presented patents ... As much as we may decry patents and the trolls that come with them, they are the backbone of our innovations.

Patents at their best enable the brilliant minds to protect their ideas and foster the drive to innovate. At their worst they are used as weapons by the greedy and the trolls to beat innovation into submission and make a buck doing it. With creating a community around the patent process one would hope that the bright light of truly concerned participant will shine a light on these trolls and send them back to the dark slimy caves that gave them birth.

But Tony Hung calls is, "Sheer idiocy":

Does anyone else have an alarm bell going off in their heads? ... Social systems where people stand to gain something (monetary compensation or otherwise) lead to its weaknesses getting exploited. The result is a manipulation of apparently public and apparently transparent process to ends that benefit specific people. And this isn’t some fancy shmancy “web2.0″ project. The stakes are high and they are real ... unlike other social networks on the web, the guys behind the US Patent Office have to be bullet proof. And they don’t have time to learn from mistakes.
...
How could the system be subverted? Ask any third rate author on Amazon wanting to pump his or her book. Or, an obsecure hotel in Mexico wanting to get a little more business through Tripadvisor. Or, any top 30 Digger, even ... Companies could create sock puppet accounts, or bribe existing users to report on patent or trademark applications that are being revued, before they actually get accepted. Rival companies could even go through a “negative” voting slant, and get rival patent applications tanked so their own products or services could get an edge. Man, the list goes on and on ... The potential for gain is just too high for some companies to NOT try and sockpuppet their way to patent or trademark success.

Sean Wilden is more circumspect:

The only thing that can be done through the wiki is to offer evidence of prior art that may invalidate the patent applications. Of course, MS employees could try to invalidate all of, say, IBM's patent applications, or opponents of patents in general could try to invalidate everyone's applications, perhaps even submitting bogus prior art. That's why they're trying to create a reputation system, initially determining the weight to give a particular submission by the submitter's academic and professional credentials and then after the system has been running for a while using submission history -- favoring the submissions of those who have submitted solid prior art citations in the past.

I don't see any way this won't be an improvement over the present system.

And CubanCorona adds:

Remember, the law as it currently stands states, "A person shall be entitled to a patent unless..." Thus, the burden is on the examiner to PROVE that a patent should not be granted. This can be VERY hard, even when the technology appears clearly to be unpatentable.
...
Give the Patent Office some credit here. This is a DRASTIC and REVOLUTIONARY change they are trying to institute here. It is VERY progressive, and it seems very in-tune with the open-source trend in information sharing and collaboration. They clearly recognize the need for change, and they really are working to find the right solution.

Jack Schofield is amazed:

Amazing news! US Patent Office gets a clue! ... With luck, the system could reduce the number of patents granted for wheels, perpetual motion machines, ladder rankings for games and browser plug in systems, although it's not quite as sensible as banning software patents altogether. It could also add to the general gaiety of nations.

Buffer overflow:

Around the Net

• The Old New Thing : Hiding files is not the same as protecting them
• Techdirt: Would You Like Some Social Networking With That Network Switch?
• Good Morning Silicon Valley: Sergey thought it said "most impotent people" and almost choked
• Eric Bangeman: FCC forces rural phone companies to carry VoIP traffic
• Jacqui Cheng: Diebold may leave e-voting business
• Tom Olzak: You're posting my what??

Around Computerworld

• Michael R. Farnum: Grassroots security - securing where it really counts
• Ryan Faas: Integrating Mac OS X's Addres Book and iCal with Exchange Servers
• Preston Gralla: Why Verio is the world's worst hosting service
• Martin MC Brown: Skype with conference services redux
• C. J. Kelly: Our overly automated impersonal world is a nightmare
• Shark Tank: Getting the message
• Douglas Schweitzer: Is disk drive reliability better or worse?
• Shark Bait: Driving the point home

Previously in IT Blogwatch

• OneCare misses malware in Teutonic test (and Rube-fire)
• Wired has a dig at Digg (and training phocoenidae)
• Your CompUSA is ClosedUSA (and VXer hates Symantec)
• Ning nixes naysayers nicely now (and moon egg)
• Gates: I need more visas (and flying beer)
• Older posts

And finally... Hilarious scrapped Universal Studios employee orientation video [occasional bad language; written and directed by South Park's Matt Stone and Trey Parker, starring Steven Spielberg, Demi Moore, Sly Stallone, etc.]

Richi Jennings is an independent technology and marketing consultant, specializing in email, blogging, Linux, and computer security. A 20 year, cross-functional IT veteran, he is also an analyst at Ferris Research. Contact Richi at blogwatch@richi.co.uk.