Keep Patent Reform Focused and Consensus-Driven - American Commitment

There is an overwhelming consensus in favor of reining in litigation abuses by “patent trolls,” companies that amass large portfolios of dodgy patents for the sole purpose of litigating against inventors, innovators, and companies large and small.
A huge coalition of companies on all sides of the more contentious recent fights over intellectual property protection agree on this point, recently writing: “some entities use patents to tax innovation, not to promote it. Such companies accuse innovators of infringement — not to capture the value of the patent, but to demand settlements based on what their targets would have to spend to fight them in court.”
They are right. And Chariman Bob Goodlatte’s proposed draft bill to address this problem contains many sensible provisions to balance the need to protect legitimate patents while limiting abusive lawsuits and their attendant costs. Fee shifting, heightened pleading standards, and disclosure of real parties in interest are all positive reforms.
However, extremely controversial provisions expanding the new covered business method patent review procedure are presently positioned to hitch a ride on consensus patent reform legislation. That would be a mistake. Already, the newly created review procedure is at risk of breaching its intended limitation to the financial services sector and make nearly all valid software patents vulnerable to legalized infringement during the review period. Rather than codify this breach, Congress would be best served to either clarify the limitation in the America Invents Act, or at least remain silent on the point pending further assessment by USPTO and the courts.
We recently joined a group letter of conservative groups that work on intellectual property issues expressing this concern to Congress.
Conservative groups express concerns about CBM review