Chinese national gets 12 years for software piracy (Bloomberg)
US imprisons Chinese man for $100M software piracy crimes.

Taiwan faces resistance over SOPA-like anti-piracy proposal (IDG News)
A proposal in Taiwan to enforce copyright laws by blocking access to top piracy sites is facing concerns that the measures could impinge on Internet freedoms on the island.

Quick inspections show software piracy still a headache (The Saigon Times Daily)
A quick inspection just launched by the Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism of Vietnam shows software copyright violations at many companies and computer stores are still prevalent, a ministry official said.

Fashion brand Tory Burch files four lawsuits (SecuringIndustry.com)
Fashion brand Tory Burch has filed lawsuits accusing four wholesale companies of selling fake versions of its jewelry.

Keith Kupferschmid is General Counsel and SVP, Intellectual Property Policy & Enforcement at SIIA.

Occasionally, scientific principles apply to the political sciences just as they do to the physical sciences – and in this case to the issue of patent litigation abuse.  Newton’s first law of motion states that an object in motion tends to remain in motion.  That motion can be measured by a property called “momentum,” which your average high school text book defines as strength or force gained by motion or by a series of events.

Like a giant boulder rolling down Mount Everest, patent troll legislation has been picking up a head of steam over the past few weeks.  The momentum for action on patent reform is growing by the day.  Just look at the significant patent events taking place since the beginning of 2013:

• At a Google+ Hangout, President Obama took on patent trolls, saying that patent reform in the AIA was only a partial fix to the patent troll problem, and argued that more needs to be done to stop these abusive patent lawsuits.  He said:  “[Patent trolls] don’t actually produce anything themselves. They’re just trying to essentially leverage and hijack somebody else’s idea and see if they can extort some money out of them.”  “There’s a delicate balance between protecting intellectual property and making sure people aren’t ruined financially by patent trolls.  What we need to do is pull together additional stakeholders and see if we can build some additional consensus on smarter patent laws.”

• A few weeks later, Congressmen DeFazio and Chaffetz introduced H.R. 845, the Saving High-tech Innovators from Egregious Legal Disputes (SHIELD) Act.  Like the bill with the same name that was introduced by both congressmen last year, the bill attempts to place the financial burden of abusive patent litigation on patent trolls by forcing a patent troll that loses its case on patent validity or infringement grounds to pay the defendant’s costs.

• A few weeks after that the House Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on the Courts, Intellectual Property and the Internet (“IP Subcommittee”) held a hearing entitled “Abusive Patent Litigation: The Impact on American Innovation & Jobs, and Potential Solutions,” which addressed abusive patent litigation by patent trolls.  The hearing drew considerable interest from the Subcommittee members as 21 of the 26 Subcommittee members attended the hearing and asked questions.

• Shortly afterwards, the House IP Subcommittee Committee held another hearing on patent litigation abuse, titled “Abusive Patent Litigation: The Issues Impacting American Competitiveness and Job Creation at the International Trade Commission and Beyond.”

• During this whole time, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office kept its foot on the pedal by examining and holding roundtable discussions on various issues related to patent abuse.

Then we flipped the calendar to May and things got even more eventful:

• On May 6^th, Senator Schumer (D-NY) introduced S. 866, “Patent Quality Improvement Act of 2013”, which would expand and extend the existing post grant review (PGR) process presently available for business method patents.

• On May 15^th, Representative Deutch (D-FL) introduced H.R. 2024, “End Anonymous Patents Acts”, which would amend the patent law to require disclosure of ownership, real-party-in-interest, and transfers of ownership of patents.

• On May 22^nd, Senator Cornyn (R-TX) introduced S. 1013, “Patent Abuse Reduction Act”, which SIIA applauded.  The bill:  (i) includes a heightened pleading requirement; (ii) requires disclosure and joinder of real-parties-in-interests to a patent; (iii) addresses the asymmetry in discovery by requiring parties to pay for anything beyond core documents; and (iv) includes a fee shifting provision that awards costs and expenses (including fees) to the prevailing party unless the loser’s position was substantially justified or exceptional circumstances make the reward unjust.

• On May 22^nd, Vermont enacted the country’s first-ever state anti-patent troll legislation and Vermont Attorney General Bill Sorrell filed a patent suit against MPHJ Technology Investments, in what appears to be the first state attorney general lawsuit against a patent troll.

• On May 23^rd, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Goodlatte released a discussion draft of legislation to address the problem of abusive patent litigation.  The discussion draft is the result of bipartisan, bicameral collaboration between Chairman Goodlatte and Senate Judiciary Chairman Leahy, a summary of which can be found here.

Then just yesterday — a few hours before House Judiciary Chairman Goodlatte spoke at SIIA’s new Tech Policy Speaker Series which brought together tech and non-tech industries representatives and public interest groups to talk about patent litigation abuse — the White House released a study on the issue that documents the significant toll patent trolls are taking on the U.S. economy and innovation, and issued its own announcement setting forth a comprehensive plan to address patent litigation abuse.  The plan sets forth a minimum of seven legislative recommendations and five executive orders aimed at combatting the patent troll problem.

Also, yesterday Randall R. Rader, chief judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, joined by Colleen Chien of Santa Clara University and David Hricik of Mercer University, joined the chorus of thought leaders requesting patent troll reform, and more specifically fee shifting, in an Op-Ed that appeared in the New York Times.

With the Administration’s announcement yesterday it is fair to say the volume of the discussion is now at a fever pitch.  It is rare to see such a uniform, voluminous and immediate response to a policy issue, let alone an intellectual property policy issue.  The call for reform has come from industry and government, from academia and the courts, from Republicans and Democrats, from state and federal officials, and from the White House and Congress.  The recognition of the problem is so universal, and, so strongly supported by the White House, congressional leadership, and so many other interested parties that it is abundantly clear that any further debate as to whether we need legislation to address the patent troll problem has been foreclosed.

With the door slammed tight on the need for legislation, we now turn our attention to what that legislation ought to look like.  The various legislative initiatives put forward in May and the Administration Plan released yesterday address many of the problems caused by patent troll behaviors and provide a great first step toward enacting effective legislation aimed at reducing patent litigation abuse.  If we have learned anything from Newton’s first law of motion it’s that the patent troll issue will remain very much in motion until effective and meaningful legislation is enacted.

To be continued…

Keith Kupferschmid is General Counsel and SVP, Intellectual Property Policy & Enforcement at SIIA.