July 12, 2013
Limelight Networks v. Akamai sits before the Supreme Court, awaiting a decision as to certiorari. At issue is whether an accused infringer "may be held liable for inducing patent infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 271(b) even though no one has committed direct infringement under §271(a)." The root problem was incompetent prosecution, in drafting claims that neglected to render a single party culpable.
Hal Wegner points to the PTO for not examining claims for the defect of identifying a single infringer: "The first lesson is the inadequacy of the patent licensure examination." Beyond that, Wegner blames the patent system: "The patent licensure procedure defects go way beyond the "all elements" rule. Earliest reform of the current system is necessary." But Wegner is pointing his finger in the wrong direction.
The simple fact is that most prosecutors are not especially competent. Patent Hawk sees many defective patents on a daily basis, with a wide variety of problems, from claim defects to disclosure deficiencies.
Most prosecutors are unaware of how patents are enforced. As they confine their practice to prosecution, largely ignorant of litigation, they just don't know what a good patent is.
If you want a quality patent, by a prosecutor that works in litigation, contact Platinum Patents.
Posted by Patent Hawk at July 12, 2013 3:31 PM | Prosecution