Director Lee: IP is a Necessary Key Piece of President-Elect Trump’s Promised Economic Growth and Job Creation

Today, USPTO Director provided her first Post-Election speech that includes some thoughts on IP policy after Obama.

I believe the incoming administration must and will continue our effort to promote innovation fueled by a strong and robust IP system. Support for IP in the United States has a long history of bipartisanship, and there’s no reason to imagine that changing with a new president and a new Congress, both of whom have economic growth as a top priority. . . .

I’m optimistic the incoming administration will share our appreciation of the importance of intellectual property as a driver of economic growth. As I look ahead, I foresee legislative patent reform changes will continue to be discussed in Congress, though those conversations will likely occur later in the term after some of the other priorities including filling a Supreme Court vacancy, immigration and tax reform are addressed, and any legislative patent reform will likely be more targeted, rather than the comprehensive reforms we’ve seen in prior Congresses. I would hope any legislative proposal will take into account the numerous positive changes that have occurred recently in the patent system including: through the courts, including on attorneys fees, pleading requirements and discovery limits, and at the USPTO through the PTAB and the agency’s efforts to improve the quality of patents in our system. As far as issues, I predict legislative discussions may include venue reform and possibly changes to Section 101 and PTAB. On venue, with nearly half of the patent cases filed in 2015 filed in a single district out of 94 federal judicial districts, it is easy for critics to contend that plaintiffs seek out this district preferentially for the wrong reasons. And the mere perception that there are advantages to be gained by forum-shopping challenges the public’s faith in the patent system. So there will be continuing pressure for legislative (and likely judicial) action on the issue of venue. The scope of any legislative reform remains is to be determined, but I predict that the focus will be on more targeted, rather than comprehensive reform as we saw these past couple Congresses. Further, I anticipate that the USPTO’s work across the globe to ensure that other countries have strong IP protections adequate enforcement mechanisms and remedies, and appropriate technology transfer (or licensing and competition) policies, will continue in the next Administration particularly in such countries as China and others. This is a President-elect that has promised economic growth and job creation in our country, and IP will necessarily be a key piece to achieving that goal. . . .

I firmly believe that the USPTO is healthy, well-functioning and poised to successfully handle whatever challenges and opportunities lie ahead.  . . . When President Obama was inaugurated in 2009, his focus was on leading this nation’s recovery from the Great Recession. One of his first acts was to ask the Smithsonian to provide for display in the Oval Office some patent models that demonstrated past American innovation that led to new jobs and new industries. The president said that throughout our history, Americans solved problems through innovation and IP. He wanted to see reminders of that every day as he encountered the challenges he faced. The Smithsonian provided him with three models: Samuel Morse’s telegraph (1849),  John Peer’s gear cutter (1874), and Henry Williams’ steamboat wheel (1877). As I stood behind the President in the Oval Office earlier this year when he signed the Defend Trade Secrets Act, I couldn’t help but notice those three models along the wall to my left—still there almost eight years later—and feel extraordinarily humbled and honored. I feel that same honor and humility today standing before all of you and reflecting on just how much we have accomplished under this administration.  I’ve been fortunate to lead the USPTO at a time when intellectual property issues have been front and center on the consciousness of the American public and President and to have had the opportunity to help guide the direction in a small way. My hope is that the President-elect keeps the patent models from Morse, Peer and Williams in his office as a reminder of the importance of intellectual property to the economic prosperity that I know he wants for our country.

Read the full remarks here.

Dennis Crouch

About Dennis Crouch

Law Professor at the University of Missouri School of Law. Co-director of the Center for Intellectual Property and Entrepreneurship.

121 thoughts on “Director Lee: IP is a Necessary Key Piece of President-Elect Trump’s Promised Economic Growth and Job Creation

  1. >>Dennis says: Unlike for Morse, Google’s patents do not seem to have been critical to its success.

    I think this is an incredibly important issue. I think that this issue deserves an entire blog post. I think you are wrong. I think that the early Google patents were probably more valuable than any other patent in history.

    You have had blog posts on here that have said they believe the early Google patents deserve protection.

    Lee probably did not mention the Google patents because part of her judicial activism is to end protection for information processing patents.

    So, the issue is what is reality? We know for sure that the Google patents are tied directly to 10’s of billions of dollars of revenue (the search still provides Google with 90 percent of its revenue.) We know for sure that patents encouraged the open development of the main Google technology. But, what is at issue is whether or not the Google patents helped Google exclude others from copying.

    (Also, please try to control your paid blogger infestation. It is impossible to have any discussion that does not fit the template of an anti-patent agenda without being blasted. I’d go after the green things with four eyes and snakes coming out of their body first.)

    1. Well, one fact is certain, Stanford University, got close to a $1B in license revenue from google, and but for the google patent, google would have paid zero.

  2. It is a total mystery who the misogynist white nationalist maniac elect will put in charge of the PTO. We can only look at who he’s been nominating to other positions and speculate.

    Take Sid Miller, the current Texas agriculture commissioner, who is reportedly being considered for the position of Secretary of Agriculture.

    Here’s a represenative tweet from good old rich white cowboy Sid:

    link to 3.bp.blogspot.com

      1. Rule #1: Never take advice from a misogynist l0 ser who supports a white nationalist maniac.

        Rule #2: Never click on a link provided by 6.

        1. Actually, I thought that the link provided by 6 was worded more in your favor and less in 6’s view, as the premise of the article is more in line with your views than his (and it was merely the “what to do about it” that differed in what you do).

          1. It is very much worded in “his favor” it is written specifically by lefties to try to get lefties back to a position where they can win in 4 years. But MM doesn’t care about any of that. He’s perfectly happy letting the isms run rampant so that he’ll have plenty of victims to qq about.

              1. The coiner of the term “feminism” was also a founding socialist. And an anti-semite.

                Wow, that’s s00per interesting.

                Tune in next time when 6 discovers where pee-pee comes from.

          2. News flash, kids: I read plenty.

            You seem to be lab0ring under the impression that you just won some landslide election after a fair contest in which the issues were debated, and that because you won that somehow proves “you were right.”

            That’s not what happened. What happened is that a racist mis0gynist self-absorbed narcissist path 0logical maniac was just elected to be President by a bunch of ign 0rant s x ckers and like-minded l0 wlifes (like you two). There are all kinds of ways to deal with that. One of them is to keep reminding people about what actually happened, and why.

            1. “News flash, kids: I read plenty.”

              Of gynocentric nonsense and self-reinforcing news media for good group-think. We know MM. You’re an old timer, or just about are, and it’s time to broaden your horizons and set down the gynocentrism.

              “You seem to be lab0ring under the impression that you just won some landslide election”

              What is it? 306 to 232? I mean, it looks like a landslide. It certainly wasn’t “down to the wire”. Though Obama did do better.

              “after a fair contest”

              It most certainly wasn’t a fair contest. Hillary had the media, their legion of brainwashed “muh victims”, the DNC, the RNC establisment, huge warchest, huge numbers of vag voters, huge numbers of lefty tw at-men, a gyn oce ntric society, the “firstness” of a woman pres, Obama and a hundred thou other shills, innumerable PACs, literal infiltr ators/sab oteurs/pro vocateurs, a hundred focus groups, and hundred retainers to dote on her, some minor email nonsense she insisted on hushing up etc. etc. etc.

              Donald had some free media time he finangled for ratings, 22 opponents to blow through, a literal near admission to se x ual har assm ent on tape, half the war chest or less, practically no PACs, all the establishment republicans against him, meme magic, his fam and his balls.

              You know who won. In a small landslide.

              link to youtube.com

            2. “That’s not what happened. What happened is that a racist mis0gynist self-absorbed narcissist path 0logical maniac was just elected to be President by a bunch of ign 0rant s x ckers and like-minded l0 wlifes (like you two). There are all kinds of ways to deal with that. One of them is to keep reminding people about what actually happened, and why.”

              Everyone, including your own lefty buddies know that’s a lie though MM. Indeed, your comrade Bernie has denounced you. And they also know that “reminding” people isn’t going to do anything to stop the Trump train in 4 years.

              link to youtube.com

              1. The funny thing though, 6, is that Malcolm’s “swagger” is exactly the same when it comes to his feelings on patent issues.

                Next time you find yourself in alignment with him on that topic, take a step back and think about that.

                1. That IS the “swagger,” 6.

                  As I indicated, you need to pay better attention.

                  By the by, not only you, but Ned as well. Count the number of times that Malcolm has applied his “swagger” to Ned since the election…

                2. I disagree there anon. If you knew what swagger is then you would as well. I don’t mind the way he does it, so to speak, I mind the subject upon which he is touching.

                  link to google.com..69i57j0l5.1543j0j7&sourceid=chrome&es_sm=0&ie=UTF-8

            3. MM, I agree with 6 on this. I also believe that calling all Republicans racist is going to and probably already has had an effect. It has turned the Democratic Party in to a minority party.

    1. Your jeering just never ends. I remember when you were telling us how HRC was going to whip some serious a$$.

      Please just admit you are a paid blogger.

    1. my practice is contingency and hybrid fee patent infringement litigation, licensing, and monetization throughout the United States

      B0ttom-feeders rejoice!

      1. Because all of those things tied directly to value from engaging the patent process are what? Somehow innately “bad”…?

        Get into a profession in which you can believe in the work product produced (and yes, monitored).

    2. Any other awesome side effects from the election of this misogynist incompetent white nationalist maniac, Peter?

      I mean, other than your big f@t tax break which you totally need because, hey, you’re s00per important.

    3. Hey, Peter, whatever happened to this junk?

      link to pacermonitor.com

      1. A method of browsing a corpus of documents, each document of the corpus having a rank generated in response to a query of a computer user, the method using a processor executing instructions stored in a memory the method comprising the steps of:

      a) ordering the corpus into a plurality of clusters, each cluster including at least one document;

      b) determining a rank of each cluster based upon the rank of a one of the documents in the cluster; and

      c) presenting the clusters to the computer user in an order based upon cluster rank.

      Did you run out of people to threaten with this junk, Peter? How much money did you make for the awesome “services” you provided here?

      1. the present method relates to a method of logically ordering document clusters for presentation to a computer user given some indication of the user’s interests

        But the patent maximalists keep telling us that software isn’t logic! Oh, but they’re such serious people. Deep thinkers, totally not hypocrites or self-absorbed greedy shills who will do and say anything if it sounds good to their own ears.

            1. Once again you mistake my ripping apart your “arguments” with some type of “defense.”

              Here’s a hint: use actual arguments and not your usual dross.

    4. When reading Lee’s statement on patents –> I just can’t help picturing a fox lecturing on the importance of chickens with some feathers still swirling about.

  3. Maybe Trump will nominate “award winning” biologist Peter Duesberg as head of the PTO. Seems like the perfect mix of Trumpian hubris and incompetence. Plus the added bonus of ticking off his “enemies”, which — as everyone knows — is one of the major driving forces of Trump and his party.

    Read all about him here:

    link to en.wikipedia.org

    Duesberg’s views are cited as major influences on South African HIV/AIDS policy under the administration of Thabo Mbeki, which embraced AIDS denialism. Duesberg served on an advisory panel to Mbeki, convened in 2000. The Mbeki administration’s failure to provide antiretroviral drugs in a timely manner, due in part to the influence of AIDS denialism, is thought to be responsible for hundreds of thousands of preventable AIDS deaths and HIV infections in South Africa.[12][13] Duesberg disputed these findings in an article in the journal Medical Hypotheses,[14] but the journal’s publisher, Elsevier, later retracted Duesberg’s article over accuracy and ethics concerns

    Oh, and if you want, you can find a description of Duesberg as “one of the premier scientists of our age” over at Trump’s white nationalist fever swamp propaganda outlet.

    Duesberg, after all, was just “guilty of wrongthink”. So unfair!

    1. “Oh, and if you want, you can find a description of Duesberg as “one of the premier scientists of our age” over at Trump’s white nationalist fever swamp propaganda outlet.”

      I see you’ve taken a liking to Breitbart there MM. You didn’t post a link, so I looked up the “article” or “publication” that makes this assertion. It turns out this is just a random comment by a random id iot that MM is attributing to the publication. Nothing to see here folks.

        1. Shall we impugn your own biases Malcolm to Prof. Crouch, just as you so readily do with your latest P-match with 6…?

          (or is that just one of the “features” of the “ecosystem”…?)

            1. And your post doing the same here does what… exactly?

              And let me add a distinguishing factor: these comment pages are edited for content, shaping the message given by the blog.

              Can you say the same for your direct statement?

          1. Also: it continues to amuse that you keep rushing in to shield this misogynist white nationalist maniac from criticism. I thought you h@ted him? He’s cr@p, remember? You voted for Bernie Sanders, remember?

            LOL

            1. I did vote for Bernie by writing him in in the national election.

              You confuse my ripping YOU apart with some type of non-existent “defense.”

              That’s just more of your ego-driven bucketing.

                1. It is pretty funny that you clench tight your eyes (and continue from your short script ad infinitum and ad nauseum).

                  Funny in that sad and pa the t1c sense.

  4. When this incompetent misogynist white nationalist maniac gets impeached, what happens to his crony incompetent administrative appointments? Do they get to hang on and continue to screw up the country while they shovel cash into their pockets?

  5. >>Dennis says: Unlike for Morse, Google’s patents do not seem to have been critical to its success.

    I think this is an incredibly important issue. I think that this issue deserves an entire blog post. I think you are wrong. I think that the early Google patents were probably more valuable than any other patent in history.

    You have had blog posts on here that have said they believe the early Google patents deserve protection.

    Lee probably did not mention the Google patents because part of her judicial activism is to end protection for information processing patents.

    So, the issue is what is reality? We know for sure that the Google patents are tied directly to 10’s of billions of dollars of revenue (the search still provides Google with 90 percent of its revenue.) We know for sure that patents encouraged the open development of the main Google technology. But, what is at issue is whether or not the Google patents helped Google exclude others from copying.

    (Also, please try to control your paid blogger infestation. It is impossible to have any discussion that does not fit the template of an anti-patent agenda without being blasted.)

  6. Who said it (at yesterday’s Roundtable):

    [The USPTO’s] Weakening [of] patents, particularly in the emerging areas, by narrowly redefining eligibility is going to crush US innovation and push research in biotech and software invention to other shores. Already patent applications are being allowed in Europe and China on claims that have been denied in the US.

    1. Already patent applications are being allowed in Europe and China on claims that have been denied in the US.

      LOL

      That’s easily the silliest “argument” for maximizing the patenting of junk that I’ve read in a long time. Which of the professional entitled whiners driveled that nonsense out?

      You can get some really, really, really broad claims in Africa and the Middle East, too. Beware! Beware!

  7. The purpose of the USPTO Roundtables is not much different than what GM director Lopez did prior to jumping ship to VW on the eve of being appointed General Motors’ chief of North American operations. Heard that he visited many of GM’s European facilities to gain the freshest information.

    Lee will likely use the information gleaned from the USPTO Roundtables, just months prior to her departure, to hone her lobbying efforts to legislate the strictest anti-patent standards under Section 101.

    Lopez faced criminal charges. In contrast, the Revolving Door rewards those that rob the public.

    1. I love keeping you engaged in the Patently O blog, because it keeps you off the streets. We are like a sticky spiderweb, catching the unsuspecting trolls in the fantasy world of cyberspace so they don’t wander off and do real damage :-)

    2. the Revolving Door rewards those that rob the public.

      Like the lobbyist David Kappos.

      Remember him? Somehow you manage to keep your mouf shut when it comes to youur rich white patent maximalist daddy benefitting from that door. Go figure.

        1. I can see that now. I can also see that I’ve got incredible vision and a huge brain coming out of my head. You’ve got one eye and some kind of worm infestation. Just sayin’. 😉

    3. rob the public.

      Because turning the grant rate up to 11, unleashing millions of junky patent that diminish everyone’s rights, all the while stuffing tons of cash in your own pocket before, during and after is totally not robbing the public.

      Got it.

      1. As for “diminishing everyone’s rights”, there is this thing called Quid Pro Quo.

        Maybe you have heard of it…

        (Do you still think that [Old Box] has ALL future improvements “already in there”…?)

        1. , there is this thing called Quid Pro Quo.

          Oh, right.

          That’s Latin for “Disclose the function and get an entitlement to every method of achieving it.”

          LOL

  8. I believe the incoming administration must and will continue our effort to promote innovation fueled by a strong and robust IP system. [that favors illegal monopolies over the legal monopolies guaranteed by the US Constitution as the USPTO, per our efforts, becomes increasingly the “non-patent” office].

    As far as issues, I predict legislative discussions may include venue reform and possibly changes to Section 101 and PTAB. [As I revolve through the door to work as a lobbyist that proposes changes to Section 101 to assure that the USPTO becomes increasingly the “non-patent” office].

    The Roundtable yesterday was quite telling as to what we already know.

  9. Lee seems oblivious to all those who point to IPRs and the PTAB as a major negative on the strength of IP in the US. She had, and still has, a major role to play in fixing this issue, but she punted.

    Why?

    Well, I think, she need a job after she leaves the PTO.

    1. Lee seems oblivious to all those who point to IPRs and the PTAB as a major negative on the strength of IP in the US

      HULK WANT STRONG IP HULK LIKE JUNK

      Give us all a break, Ned.

      I think, she need a job

      As if you and your fellow IPR-deniers aren’t trying line your own wallets.

      By the way, how’s that white nationalist administration shaping up? Have we gotten all the Jews out of Washington DC yet?

      1. MM, you seem absolutely oblivious to crony capitalism.

        Teddy R. acted to break up the monopolies when the Barons thought that Teddy was their boy.. FDR acted to tame Wall Street and enact Social Security at a time of crisis.

        But today’s Democratic Party (save Sanders) and the Republican Elite (Bush) have lost their way. They enact elitist laws rules and regulations, pass treaties, all without considering their impact on people, on jobs, on America.

        Snear all you want at the average American who has seen his job vanish, his income reduced and who, this term, voted not for the traditional protector of the working class, the Democrat presidential nominee, but for another populist in the mold of Teddy and FDR.

        Washington is a swamp where government acts to serve the rich and powerful. The Democratic Party is part of that machine, as witness by the kowtowing of the current Director to the entrenched powers.

        MM, you truly need to take a step back and see things as they truly are.

        1. elitist laws

          LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

          Snear all you want at the average American

          I’m not “snearing” at “average Americans” at all. I’m snearing at racist Americans who get their information from fake news organizations like the kind that you regularly cite.

          without considering [the law’s] impact on people, on jobs, on America.

          Well, there was that free healthcare for millions of poor people, and the law preventing insurance companies from denying coverage to people with pre-existing conditions. Which Republicans did everything they could to block ….

          Tell me some more stories, Ned. Tell me the one about the white nationalist misogynist maniac without any government experience who rode to the White House on a wave of racism. That’s an especially amusing one. You voted for that maniac, didn’t you? Of course you did.

          another populist in the mold of Teddy and FDR

          LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

          Oh my goodness. Wait a minute. Got to catch my breath.

          LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

          Edward Heller: yet another wingn-t patent maximalist who will do and say literally anything if it sounds good to his own ears.

          LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

              1. …as he has been doing so for a decade now.

                You never noticed before because of your propensity of “6-is-a-genius-because-he-agrees-with-me” Ends alignment malady.

          1. “I’m not “snearing” at “average Americans” at all.”

            He only did that the other day, he swears!

            “I’m snearing at racist Americans who get their information from fake news organizations like the kind that you regularly cite.”

            All avg americans are RAYCIST! Unless they’re liberal! Then they’re no longer RAYCIST!

            “Tell me the one about the white nationalist misogynist maniac without any government experience who rode to the White House on a wave of racism. ”

            Yeah Ned, didn’t you know Trump was a RAYCIST MISOGYNIST who is totally not gynocentric or victim-centric enough for the job? Gynocentrism4Lyfe! Victims4Lyfe!

          2. MM, you might want to take a hard look at yourself. What did people most resent about Trump. His calling people names and ridiculing them, his bullying, the outrageous nonsense he constantly spewed forth. Read what you write, MM. It is embarrassing.

            1. What did people most resent about Trump. His calling people names and ridiculing them, his bullying, the outrageous nonsense he constantly spewed forth.

              LOL I’m not spewing forth any “outrageous nonsense”, Mr. Edward “I Proudly Support White Nationalists As Long as I Get My Patents” Heller. I’m just calling it like it is.

              Also, to be a “bully” means to use your greater power to abuse weaker people. I’m not doing that. That is certainly a big part of Trump’s agenda however (or at least the agenda of his supporters).

              What me — and the many many many millions of people like me — resent about Trump is that he’s a self-promoting hypocrite who doesn’t care about anybody or anything except himself and he surrounds himself with and promotes misogynists and racists. That’s not even including his anti-environmental anti-science attitudes and his neverending illegal shenanigans.

              But you voted for him, Ned. Now you get to own it. Quit your moaning and crying about being criticized and celebrate the awesomeness! Stuff that cash in your pockets and be proud.

              And please cut the baloney with “cronies”. Trump is stuffing his administration with the l0west l0wlife crony grifters, ultraconservative l0sers that this country kicked to the curb years ago but somehow (so mysterious!) they never stopped showing up on the “liberal media’s” TV boxes. You think nobody can see this?

        2. elitist laws

          Expanding social security? Blocked by Republicans who want to destroy the government and put all the power and money into corporate hands..

          Making it easier for women to get healthcare and birth control? Endlessly contested by Republicans who want to destroy the government and put all the power and money into corporate hands

          and on and on and on

          Not everyone is as ign0rant as whoever it is that you usually spew your silliness at, Ned. You really need to prepare yourself for an unprecedented sh-tst0rm. Oh but wait! Not really a problem for you. You’re in California which is blue as blue, and you’ve got tons of money.

          Maybe you should set up shop in Missouri, next to Dennis. I hear that’s going to be a hugely popular place now because of all the awesome jobs that will be created there. Go for it, Ned! Put your money where your spewage is. Run away from those oh-so-terrible “elites” in California with all their environmental regulations and diversity and “isms” and educated people. Nobody wants that “libt@rd” stuff.

          1. MM, I recall Al Gore calling for the end of logging in Oregon to protect an owl. I recall Hillary Clinton telling the miners of West Virginia how she was going to protect jobs by shutting down coal.

            The insensitivity of today’s Democratic Party to the working man is legendary.

            Now, until this election, I could not say that the Republican Party was any better. They themselves pursued abstract goals of free trade and less government that were not in the interests of the poor an the middle class. I could never truly understand why the poor and middle class would vote for Bush, McCain, Romney. Of course, they did not.

            Trump, despite his crudeness, at least had his policy goals correct. That is why so many of the working class that normally voted Democratic switched.

            Minorities, it is true, stayed loyal to the Democrats, but I think this was largely because of race baiting and demonetization. When people who knew Trump personally vouched for him, that was enough for me.

            1. When people who knew Trump personally vouched for him, that was enough for me.

              Oh, that’s s00per compelling stuff right there.

              I could never truly understand why the poor and middle class would vote for Bush, McCain, Romney. Of course, they did not

              In fact, many many millions of poor and middle class people voted for Bush, McCain and Romney.

              I recall Al Gore calling for the end of logging in Oregon to protect an owl. I recall Hillary Clinton telling the miners of West Virginia how she was going to protect jobs by shutting down coal.

              Whatever you recall, Ned, those issues are not as simple as “jobs versus no jobs.” California could create tons of jobs tomorrow by permitting companies to drill oil all up and down the coastline. Let’s set up an oil well on every beach that can fit one! Because jobs! What could go wrong?

              Heck, let’s start making lead paint again. Jobs! There’s room next to that school for a cyanide purification plant. Jobs!

              Best part: Trump will make sure his wealthy white natioalist friends get to run and manage the plants. What could go wrong?

          1. MM, Sanders and Trump shared the same policy goals on trade and crony capitalism. Had Sanders won the Democratic Party nomination, he probably would have won the election.

            1. Had Sanders won the Democratic Party nomination, he probably would have won the election.

              Oh, I don’t know about that. Sanders was a Jew! And a liberal! He was a Senator! A creature of Washington! He was wealthy! He used email! And gosh knows what else the anti-Semite white nationalists would have concocted against him.

              Sanders and Trump shared the same policy goals on trade and crony capitalism

              Anything other shared “policy goals”? Destroying the EPA? Lowering taxes on the wealthiest? Right. That’s what I thought.

              And Trump never had a “policy goal” against crony capitalism. He’s a path0 l0gical liar, Ned. And you believe him because, well, you’re an id i0t.

              1. MM, I viewed Hillary as part of the problem. She offered no possibility of ending crony capitalism given her proclivity for play for pay. Play for pay is what crony capitalism is all about. And it works even if one is simply a person like Lee whose current policy choices are made in a certain way because she needs to get a job after she leaves government.

                Pat Choate wrote a book about how US trade is corrupted by foreign interests who hired US trade regulators after leaving government. But the problem is across the board. The SEC regulates Wall Street, but who are these regulators and where do they work after leaving the SEC?

                As to Trump, I believe him that he truly wants to do something about crony capitalism and any policy that hurts America. I also agree with his foreign policy of not poking our noses into other people’s wars. His criticism of Hillary’s interventionist foreign policy was spot on.

                And I know that others have said to me that believing anything Trump says is foolish. But there was no alternative in the race, nobody like Sanders.

                But, proof is in the pudding. If Trump does not even try to fix things, then you are right and I am wrong.

  10. Speaking of tech companies with vast numbers of incredibly junky “do it on a computer” patents:

    The two tech giants [Facebook and Google] will no longer allow fake news sites to use their ad-selling services, the latest reaction to accusations that a flood of misleading internet content influenced voters during the U.S. presidential campaign. …

    Google has also committed to tweaking its search algorithms. On Monday, the top result for “final election result” directed users to a fake news site with incorrect numbers. “In this case we clearly didn’t get it right, but we are continually working to improve our algorithms,” Google said in a statement.

    Clearly we need more a million more patents on logic! Then Google can read them all and figure out which ones work. Oh but wait: they all do! It says so right in the spec ….

    LOL

  11. Assuming that midwest electorate’s concern about Jobs! is what drove them to vote for an incompetent racist misogynist (a big assumption, fyi), Obama’s patent policy should have been to shift focus away from “soft” innovation (e.g., methods of billing people for computer network usage, or methods of piloting a robot car) and into innovation that would encourage better infrastructure and energy conservation. There were some minor efforts made in that regard, but not enough.

    Those kinds of jobs fill two needs: (1) they help put money in the pockets of workers without college educations, thereby minimizing resentment of “others”; and (2) the stuff they build benefits everybody in the region where the stuff is being built, further strengthening the local economy.

    Trump, of course, will probably encourage more patents on methods of Internet gambling.

  12. Reagan claimed he was an environmentalist as he decimated the environment.

    And now we have Trump and his white nationalist, climate-change denying team basically promising they’re going to decimate the environment.

    But, hey, as long as Trump nominates some judges who love software patents to the CAFC then who cares about air. In less than 20 years, computers will filing their own patents, examining them, and litigating them. We’ll just watch. Well, some of us will anyway. Jobs! Yay.

    1. So, Dennis this is another jeering nonsense post by MM. He is now trying intimate that anyone that supports strong patents is also all the negative attributes (as described by MM) of Trump. Please try to have a grown-up discussion.

      1. No, I’m suggesting that wanting “strong patents” is a woefully insufficient excuse to support all the other atrocities that will accompany this white nationalist maniac to the White House.

        1. The loaded statements you make are terrible. When was the last time you beat your wife MM? I am sure it was just in the last day or so while you were drunk and on crack.

          So, MM, who said I or anyone support Trump or that I or anyone supported Trump just for patents? No one.

          1. who said I … supported Trump just for patents

            Oh, I’m so deeply sorry. I must have misunderstood your endless stream of comments bashing Obama and celebrating the super glorious future that will follow from Der Trumpenfuhrer’s brilliant pro-patent judicial appointments.

            My bad.

            What else do you support our white nationalist President Elect for? His misogyny? His complete lack of experience? His maniac militaristic posturing?

            LOL

            1. MM >> “your endless stream of comments … celebrating the super glorious future that will follow from Der Trumpenfuhrer’s …”

              Except I have not made one comment that fits that category. So, again you are just out and out 1ying.

    2. MM, cost vs. benefits. Cost vs. benefits.

      Only the elitist cares not about the impact of laws and regulation on people. These kind of people are, in my view, sociopaths.

      1. Only the elitist cares not about the impact of laws and regulation on people.

        That’s nice. You really expect anyone except a lizardbrain to believe that these people who “care not about the impact of laws and regulation” are confined or even mostly represented by Democrats? Seriously?

        These kind of people are, in my view, sociopaths.

        LOL “Politicians whose cost/benefit analysis I disagree with are soci0paths! Meanwhile, I support white nationalists because they promise to create jobs even if they have no coherent plan for doing so. And I’m not hypocrite!”

        LOLOLOLOLOL Keep the laughs coming, Ned. After all, there’s no chance that this is going to blow up in your face.

        1. All spin from Malcolm.

          Zero reflection on his own actions (and not to mention his number one meme of
          A
          O
          O
          T
          W
          M
          D…)

          Maybe 6 can tell us if those are signs of psychopathy.

        2. MM, I have always included Republicans in the “elitist” category. They have always and consistently been behind free trade even though such demonstrably costs jobs. Republicans backed NAFTA and the TPP.

          Take NAFTA Put a highly industrialized, high wage, a highly regulated country side-by-side with a country that has none of the above. Provide open borders and free trade between the two. Where will business locate their factories? The answer is obvious. So that anybody that worked in the American factories that were moved to Mexico should know that the people supported NAFTA did not really care about what happened to them.

  13. You have to love it. Reagan claimed he was an environmentalist as he decimated the environment. And, now Lee claims she is pro-patent as she has attempted to decimate the patent system.

    Also, —really–the former chief patent counsel of Google did not list the Google patent that made Google one of the largest companies in the world?

      1. 1) The information processing methods of the early Google patents were without dispute that I have seen critical to the success of Google.

        2) I am not sure how much of a role the Google patents played in stopping other companies from copying Google’s information processing methods. Do you know Dennis? I have heard that they were critical in preventing Microsoft from just duplicating their information processing methods, but that was just a blog post. I haven’t seen any rigorous analysis of this issue.

        So, I would say without question that the Google patents were “critical” in the development of the company Google. If for no other reason, the open environment of sharing information that occurred due to the patents.

      2. And—let’s be real–patents enable employees to easily switch companies, enable employees to share their work at conferences, and encourage investment.

        The patent system is critical and is part of every major technological company in the US that I know of.

Comments are closed.