CCIA Supports Risch-Udall Amendment To Patent Reform Bill

BY CCIA Staff
March 7, 2011

The Computer & Communications Industry Association has sent a letter to Senators Monday morning, asking them to support an amendment to promote real reform in S. 23, which is up for a vote. CCIA is concerned that current provisions in the patent bill make it difficult for the Patent and Trademark Office to reexamine low quality patents, leaving costly litigation as the only choice.

The following comments can be attributed to CCIA President & CEO Ed Black:

“While we appreciate some of the fixes in the manager’s amendment striking controversial litigation provisions, the patent reform bill does not address some of the real roadblocks to innovation and in some instances makes the current situation even worse for the tech industry.

“We hope to see additional improvements before the bill becomes law. The Risch-Udall amendment strikes harmful changes in S. 23, which would restrict the ability of the PTO to reexamine low quality patents. This leaves costly litigation as the only solution to low quality patents. Low quality patents weaken the entire system and serve as a roadblock to real innovation and the jobs that come with it.

“There is widespread support within the tech industry for the Risch-Udall amendment and we are optimistic that Senators understand this amendment benefits innovation and will support it.”

Related Articles

PTO Requests Comments On Changes To Make It Difficult To Challenge Weak Patents

Oct 19, 2020

Washington – The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has requested comments on making permanent changes to the system currently used to challenge weak or overly broad patents known as inter partes review.  The Computer & Communications Industry Association sent a letter to Patent and Trademark Office Director Iancu last year warning him that making it…

CCIA Expresses Disappointment In Flawed 9th Circuit Qualcomm Decision

Aug 11, 2020

Washington — The 9th Circuit today overturned a district court decision by Judge Lucy Koh, holding that Qualcomm had not violated the antitrust laws by refusing to license competitors in violation of its contractual obligation to do so, by refusing to sell chips unless the customer first took a patent license, and by engaging in…