The reforms are generally backed by the software and IT
industries but opposed by the pharmaceutical sector, a situation
which has blocked the passage of new laws in recent years.
The changes reduce the awards given for patent violations in a
bid to return patents to their original purpose of spurring, rather
than stifling, innovation.
Under US law a patent violation which is deemed to be 'wilful'
qualifies for a tripling of the damages due to the patent owner.
The proposed law makes it harder to prove that a violation was
wilful.
The new law would also have the effect of reducing damages
because it insists that pay outs are connected to the actual
technology infringed and not to the value of the market for the
larger products in which they might be used.
The law would also bring the US up to date with most other
countries by awarding patents to the first person to file an
application for a technology, not the first person to invent it.
That, it is hoped, would cut down on the time and expense of
companies vying to be judged the first to invent a technology.
Washington observers have said that the likely fate of the bill
has changed since Democrats, who are sympathetic to the IT industry
and patent reform, won a majority in mid-term elections last
autumn. The Republicans have historically been closer to the
pharmaceutical industry.
The legislation was introduced by a bipartisan group of
politicians from both houses of Congress, the Senate and the House
of Representatives. Led by Howard Berman, the group's mix of
politicians from both parties and both houses could represent the
bill's best chance of success.
Similar legislation was introduced last year but stalled as the
Senate awaited a vital patent decision from the Supreme Court.
