Well, well, well. After calling for “patent reform” and denouncing those who license patents without actually making a product, it seems Microsoft is hedging its bets. At least that’s how it appears to a cynic like me.

Oh, I get it. This is different. They are “providing technology,” while those who enforce patents without actually

Dr. Nathan P. Myhrvold’s recent testimony before the Senate Subcommittee on patent reform makes a strong case for the rights of small inventors and businesses in the patent arena. Coming from a now-wealthy man who could easily join the forces of big business, it’s refreshing that Dr. Myhrvold has not rewritten history or otherwise forgotten where he came from.

(Many thanks to J. Matthew Buchanan, publisher of the “Promote the Progress” I.P. blog, for making this and other records of the Subcommittee hearings available at his site.)
Continue Reading Let’s Hear it For Dr. Myhrvold!

Two themes echoed throughout yesterday’s Senate Subcommittee hearing on patent reform. First is the need to improve patent quality. Second is the need to improve efficiency in patent litigation.

Given these laudable goals, last week’s Federal Circuit decision in Hoffer v. Microsoft, et al. left me scratching my head.
Continue Reading Promoting Patent Lawsuit Efficiency — Is The Federal Circuit Aboard?