Samsung (backed by Google & Facebook) Demands Patent Law Review from Supreme Court

[dgstorm]

Despite being one of the largest patent holders in the United States, Samsung went before the U.S. Supreme Court in December 2015 and filed a petition for a review of the U.S. patent law system. Samsung basically wants the government's interpretation of design patent laws altered and revised for 21st century sensibilities. Their brief claims that the system is "antiquated" and that its current form stifles innovation across the entire tech industry.

Samsung's argument has validity. Here's a quote from AndroidAuthority with some details,

The logic is as follows: patent law was originally invented to protect ideas or inventions central to a product, but the products were so simple that a single patent might suffice. But times have changed. A smartphone can require up to a quarter billion patents, and if even one of those is found to infringe on a patent, the entirety of the product’s profit can be awarded to the patent holder. This is called the “total-profit” rule, and it is why patent trolling is such a popular business these days.

Samsung is not alone in their indictment of the U.S. Patent Law system; Google, Facebook and dozens of other organizations have joined forces with Samsung and filed amicus briefs supporting this stance. Here's a quote from Slashgear with a few more details,

So far the Supreme Court has not yet decided whether to hear Samsung's case or not, which is why the likes of Google, Facebook, Dell, HP, the EFF, and more are urging the country's highest court to do so, saying that the interpretation of design patents by the Federal Circuit is "out of touch with economic realities" and could "hinder innovation". If the Supreme Court does decide to hear the case, it will be the first time it would do so in more than a century.

What do you think of these arguments from Samsung and most of the global tech community regarding U.S. patent law needing to be revised?

 

[tech_head]

It's a broken system.
We now allow someone to patent the idea of something that is not or will not go into practice.
We allow a general patent that says "the plurality of the software being executed by a computer".
They don't specify the algorithm, they just claim that it can be done.
It's time to do away with software interface "look and feel" patents.
Patent the software, the algorithm, etc.
Make people invent and produce or go away.

 

[trestevenson]

They certainly have a legitimate argument here. Patent reform has been a long time coming. Hopefully this case will bring some much needed attention to the issue.

 

[Jonny Kansas]

Couldn't agree more. I've been thinking this since the "Patent War" suits all started up. Apple patented "Slide to unlock" and went after people for using it or a similar UI element. Are you kidding me!?

I hope the court hears them and I hope they make changes for the good in patent law.

 

[IIGood]

Apple patented "Slide to unlock" and went after people for using it or a similar UI element. Are you kidding me!?

Or better yet, the "rectangular device with rounded corners."