this post was submitted on 12 Nov 2024
96 points (100.0% liked)

Programming

17432 readers
244 users here now

Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!

Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.

Hope you enjoy the instance!

Rules

Rules

  • Follow the programming.dev instance rules
  • Keep content related to programming in some way
  • If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos

Wormhole

Follow the wormhole through a path of communities !webdev@programming.dev



founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

The EFF is urging people to contact their legislators now, before the vote.

https://act.eff.org/action/tell-congress-we-can-t-afford-more-bad-patents

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] bitcrafter@programming.dev 8 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Could someone point me to a more in-depth legal analysis of this bill? The text of it is here. It looks to me like it is mostly about replacing vague parts of the U.S. code with regards to patents with more explicit instructions, and one of these instructions even seems to give courts explicit permission to judge whether an invention is eligible for a patent rather than taking this power away:

IN GENERAL.—In an action brought for infringement under this title, the court, at any time, may determine whether an invention or discovery that is a subject of the action is eligible for a patent under this section, including on motion of a party when there are no genuine issues of material fact.

Furthermore, one really nice thing that this bill does is that it makes it clear that if the invention or discovery solely involves a process or material occurring naturally with no modification--a human gene being explicitly called out--then it is explicitly ineligible for a patent.

To be clear, though, I am not a legal expert, which is why it would be great if someone would provide an in-depth analysis of exactly where the problem is rather than just saying that the bill is bad.

[–] mox@lemmy.sdf.org 5 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

You might start with the documents posted to the EFF site over the past year. For example, the September opposition letters include specific court decisions and put them in context, including commentary from law professors.

https://www.eff.org/search/site/pera