I also think this may be the best model for LOPSA to follow, at this time.
Although IEEE-USA implies that they have taken a stance on this legislation
as an organization, I don't think LOPSA has yet earned enough industry
relevance to make it worth the cost and effort to try to focus on such.

But a "call to arms" for the individual members, and perhaps to like-minded,
affiliated organizations, is certainly warranted and _accessible_ with
limited commitment of resources...and it wouldn't hurt if those who take
action self-identify as LOPSA members.  (Doesn't have to be anything
"over-the-top", I wouldn't think.  But a good guideline would probably be to
just note professional organization affiliations, but not to imply that the
individual speaks _for_ that organization if the organization, itself, has
not published a stance on the issue.)

--Aaron

On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 15:23, Doug Hughes <[email protected]> wrote:

>  Another great example of advocacy/policy in action.
> (and I highly encourage everybody to participate in this action)
>
>
> -------- Original Message --------  Subject: 2011 Patent Reform Act  Date:
> Wed, 01 Jun 2011 20:12:52 GMT  From: Russell Harrison
> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>  Reply-To: Russell
> Harrison <[email protected]> <[email protected]>  To:
> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
>
> IEEE Members:
>
> Congress continues to move ahead with the deeply flawed Patent Reform Act
> of 2011. To stop this bill, we need as many people as possible to contact
> Congress in the next week to express their concerns.
>
> The Patent reform Act of 2011 is the most dramatic change to US patent law
> of the last 70 years. IEEE-USA, along with many other groups, oppose the
> bill because we believe it favors large companies at the expense of smaller
> inventors when it comes to issuing patents.
>
> Specifically, the bill shifts the United States from being a"first to
> invent" country to a "first to file" country. This means that, when two
> people invent the same thing at roughly the same time, the patent would go
> to whomever got their patent application filed first. Under existing law,
> the person who invented the product first usually gets the patent.
>
> This shift would cause several problems. The most important of these is the
> effective elimination of a grace period for inventors. Currently, inventors
> can take about a year to file their patent application without risking their
> intellectual property. Under the new law, this protection would disappear so
> that inventors would have to file for a patent immediately or risk losing
> the rights to their ideas. This is true even if the inventor doesn't know if
> his/her ideas will work yet. This system establish a clear advantage for big
> companies with many lawyers, which can afford to file patents quickly and
> often. Smaller inventors and companies cannot.
>
> The Patent bill also does not do many things that it should. The bill does
> little to improve the quality of patents or of patent examiners. And it
> doesn't reform the patent system to accommodate the accelerated pace of
> innovation.
>
> A more detailed discussion of the flaws in the patent Reform Act can be
> found here:
>
> http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/may/26/patent-reform-proposals-threaten-american-prosperi/
>
> Additional details can be found at the IEEE-USA Legislative Action Center,
> which also allows you to quickly contact your legislators.
> www.ieeeusa.org/policy/lac
>
> Most people in Washington thought the Patent Bill would pass in mid-May.
> Opposition from engineers and patent attorneys have caused Congress to pause
> to reconsider the bill, but it is far from dead. A growing coalition of
> legislators have begun speaking in opposition to the bill, but unless
> Congress hears from the voters, the bill is still; likely to pass.
>
> Action on the Patent reform Act of 2011 is now expected in mid-June. Please
> contact Congress this week, even if you have already done so this year.
>
> Thank you for your help.
>
> Russell Harrison
>
> IEEE Members:
>
> Congress continues to move ahead with the deeply flawed Patent Reform Act
> of 2011.  To stop this bill, we need as many people as possible to contact
> Congress in the next week to express their concerns.
>
> The Patent reform Act of 2011 is the most dramatic change to US patent law
> of the last 70 years.  IEEE-USA, along with many other groups, oppose the
> bill because we believe it favors large companies at the expense of smaller
> inventors when it comes to issuing patents.
>
> Specifically, the bill shifts the United States from being a"first to
> invent" country to a "first to file" country.  This means that, when two
> people invent the same thing at roughly the same time, the patent would go
> to whomever got their patent application filed first.  Under existing law,
> the person who invented the product first usually gets the patent.
>
> This shift would cause several problems.  The most important of these is
> the effective elimination of a grace period for inventors.  Currently,
> inventors can take about a year to file their patent application without
> risking their intellectual property.  Under the new law, this protection
> would disappear so that inventors would have to file for a patent
> immediately or risk losing the rights to their ideas.  This is true even if
> the inventor doesn't know if his/her ideas will work yet.  This system
> establish a clear advantage for big companies with many lawyers, which can
> afford to file patents quickly and often.  Smaller inventors and companies
> cannot.
>
> The Patent bill also does not do many things that it should.  The bill does
> little to improve the quality of patents or of patent examiners.  And it
> doesn't reform the patent system to accommodate the accelerated pace of
> innovation.
>
> A more detailed discussion of the flaws in the patent Reform Act can be
> found here:
>
> http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/may/26/patent-reform-proposals-threaten-american-prosperi/
>
> Additional details can be found at the IEEE-USA Legislative Action Center,
> which also allows you to quickly contact your legislators.
> www.ieeeusa.org/policy/lac
>
> Most people in Washington thought the Patent Bill would pass in mid-May.
> Opposition from engineers and patent attorneys have caused Congress to pause
> to reconsider the bill, but it is far from dead.  A growing coalition of
> legislators have begun speaking in opposition to the bill, but unless
> Congress hears from the voters, the bill is still; likely to pass.
>
> Action on the Patent reform Act of 2011 is now expected in mid-June.
> Please contact Congress this week, even if you have already done so this
> year.
>
> Thank you for your help.
>
> Russell Harrison
>
> Click here to 
> unsubscribe.<http://unsubscribe.democracydirect.com/default.aspx?ID=00102343&Client=ieeeProd&Action=37>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.lopsa.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> This list provided by the League of Professional System Administrators
>  http://lopsa.org/
>
>
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.lopsa.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
This list provided by the League of Professional System Administrators
 http://lopsa.org/

Reply via email to