[ajb]

This is a step forward, and I hope it is successful.

However as it stands what this actually means is that finding prior art is an externality of submitting a patent claim. The cost of stopping a dubious patent from causing damage is borne by the victims, rather than the instigator. If these crowdsourcing schemes are successful, the next step should be to make filers of such patents pay a fee to those who found the prior art.

[spolsky]

I love that idea!

Until that happens, we actually expect that companies in patent-happy industries will monitor filings by their competitors and spend some of their own money and resources blocking competitors from building bad patent portfolios (there was enough of this on Peer To Patent, a very small-scale experiment, to give me confidence that it will happen)

[6ren]

That makes sense. Consumer protection law (Trade Practices Act) in Australia was designed for consumers to use - but it turned out it was always competitors who used them.