The following statement is attributed to Kate Tummarello, Executive Director of Engine, regarding the introduction of the Patent Eligibility Restoration Act of 2022:
Statement:
“The Patent Eligibility Restoration Act would open doors to the type of weak, overbroad patents that preempt innovation and harm competition. It would allow a few companies to use the patent system to tie up the fundamental building blocks startups currently rely on to build and grow, exposing startups to more threats of litigation over low-quality patents. As Congress continues to evaluate legislation in this area, we look forward to continuing to work with them toward proposals that can promote startup success.”
Background:
The Patent Eligibility Restoration Act of 2022 would amend Section 101 of the Patent Act, which defines what is and is not eligible for patent protection. Right now, abstract ideas, laws of nature, and natural phenomena cannot be patented—so a company cannot patent and seek to own, e.g., the idea of scheduling medical appointments using a computer; the process of collecting, analyzing, and displaying data; the idea of filtering e-mail; or a human gene. The bill introduced today would relax standards for patent eligibility, and unfortunately make it easier for a few companies to obtain and assert the types of weak, overbroad patents that frustrate innovation and competition and are often used to threaten startups and small businesses.
Currently, Section 101 works in two ways that are especially relevant to domestic startups. First, barring patents on abstract ideas means no one company gets to own those basic concepts of running a business or creating new innovation. Second, section 101 gives an affordable way to challenge certain low-quality patents, like the ones patent assertion entities often assert in frivolous, abusive cases.
The Patent Eligibility Restoration Act of 2022 would undercut both these benefits. Instead of focusing patent eligibility on genuine advances in technology, it would lower the bar and make it easier for one person or company to patent a basic concept. Then they could, in turn, try to block everyone else in the U.S. from using those basic ideas, leading to more lawsuits—because so many startups and small businesses rely on things like collecting and analyzing data, filtering messages, organizing and transmitting images, or using computers to schedule appointments. The bill would also make it harder to challenge weak and low-quality patents, by depriving companies an early defense in frivolous lawsuits and increasing the costs and burdens of litigation. Innovators and businesses across the country—regardless of whether they ever apply for a patent—are stakeholders in the patent system, and need patent eligibility rules that foster advances without allowing overbroad patents and abusive practices to stand in the way.
