[ianterrell]

> Shame there's not a way to do the same thing to existing software patents.

What's stopping anyone from crowd sourcing a database of prior art for existing patents that would invalidate them if it came to it?

A valid defense against patent infringement is to show that the patent shouldn't have been issued in the first place, right? So a database of Ready Made Legal Defense sounds good.

Am I missing something?

[Guvante]

Showing a patent clerk prior art is much easier than showing prior art in a courtroom.

For instance at the minimum you need to bring in an expert witness to explain the prior art. Then you have to contend with the fact that they will bring in their own expert witness to explain how your example is bogus and you both get to cross-examine. etc. etc.

[lisper]

Anyone can file a request for re-examination with the PTO.

http://www.uspto.gov/patents/stats/Reexamination_Information...

[DannyBee]

It's been tried.

Many times.

[cleverjake]

do go on.

[DannyBee]

bountyquest (paid) - existed in early 2000's

patentbusters - ditto

Peer to patent - more recent

Patexia - still exists

article one partners - which still exists and pays

I don't feel like trying to hunt down the rest, but there are/have been at least 10 or so crowdsourcing attempts, some serious, some not so serious.

[thecodeore]

THe key part is recent changes in the law have given much more weight to community/public commenting on patents, so where these may have failed in the past it is possible for them to have more success today.

Further the patent climate has become more hostile towards bad patents in recent years, more so than at in point in modern history, this will also enable more possibility for success

[DannyBee]

Your assertion remains to be seen. There are still significant downsides to submitting prior art to the PTO that also existed when bountyquest was around.

The main serious issues are still the same, in fact:

1. If you submit prior art pre-grant, that's basically that. You don't get to argue about it, only the examiner does. If the patent issues, you've now lost a possibly valuable reference if the examiner didn't use it well enough.

2. If you challenge in any of the post-grant proceedings, you'll be estopped from suing on anything you raised or could have raised.