November 13, 1997 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S12637 [From the U.S. News & World Report, Nov. the introduction of the currency. United Without specialized reprogramming, the 17, 1997] Parcel Service has done the same. Both firms systems will think the year 2000—or 00—is LATEST SOFTWARE NIGHTMARE—THE CUR- are looking into how to adapt their com- 1900, a glitch that could cause them to go RENCY CHANGE IN EUROPE COULD COST U.S. puter systems. haywire. FIRMS BILLIONS The change to the euro will affect some According to the GAO, private contractors companies more than others. For example, hired by the SSA to fix the year 2000 glitch (By John Marks) Bloomberg Financial Markets, the world’s on 42 of the 54 state disability determination For the past year or so, American busi- largest provider of financial information, services computers discovered 33 million ad- nesses have been forced to grapple with the will have to add the euro to 10 year’s worth ditional lines of code that need to be tested ‘‘millennium bug,’’ a computer programming of records—everything from trading prices to and, where necessary, fixed. glitch that threatens to wipe out bank ac- financial statements. In a recent Securities The SSA did not include the state dis- counts, financial statements, and databases and Exchange Commission filing, Alliance ability determination systems in its initial when the year 1999 becomes the year 2000. Gaming Corp. announced that it would prob- assessment of the date glitch, but now ac- Now, companies must brace themselves for ably have to ‘‘redesign new and, possibly, ex- knowledges that the systems are ‘‘mission another daunting—very expensive—software- isting’’ slot machines to accept new cur- critical’’ because of their importance in de- related problem, this one involving the new rencies. termining whether a person is medically eli- European currency known as the euro. While the initial changeover to the euro gible to receive disability payments, the Even before it is introduced on Jan. 1, 1999, may be a financial headache, the vast new GAO report said. the long-awaited euro threatens to cost market created by the currency is expected Analyzing and fixing the problem likely American business $30 billion or more to buy to be lucrative for American companies. And will be a massive undertaking. In just one of- new software and recode old programs, as no matter what it costs businesses on this fice, the GAO said it found 600,000 lines of companies with interests on the other side of side of the Atlantic to adjust their informa- code in 400 programs that operate the dis- the Atlantic attempt to adapt to the new tion technologies, they can rest assured that ability system. currency. No later than Dec. 31, 1998, people their European counterparts will be out even Without a full understanding of the scope doing business in Europe will have to rewrite more: The most recent estimate puts the of the problem on the state disability sys- their computer software to handle three dif- price of converting to the euro at $70 billion tems, ‘‘SSA increases the risk that benefits ferent base currencies at once. The value of for European businesses. and services will be disrupted,’’ the GAO the euro will have to be determined on a wrote. daily basis by its relationship to both the [From the Washington Post, Nov. 5, 1997] Kathleen M. Adams, SSA’s chief informa- dollar and other European currencies. In SOCIAL SECURITY GETS YEAR 2000 WARNING— tion officer, said the agency has recently re- other words, every bill, every financial state- MORE WORK NEEDED ON GLITCH, GAO SAYS ceived reports from all 50 states detailing ment, and every stock price in the nine (By Rajiv Chandrasekaran) their plans to fix the disability systems. countries set to join what is known as the The General Accounting Office today will ‘‘They will be tested and implemented by European Monetary Union will have to be warn that the Social Security Administra- December 1998, like the rest of Social Secu- ‘‘triangulated.’’ So far, says Sarwar tion (SSA) faces a possible computer crash in rity,’’ Adams said. ‘‘I am very comfortable Kashmeri, a corporate consultant special- the year 2000 because the agency has not [the disability systems] will be ready.’’ izing in the issue, no commercial software started analyzing or fixing several crucial Adams said five states already have fin- exists to make that calculation. ‘‘We have systems affected by the year 2000 software ished the conversion work for the disability been focusing very hard on the year-2000 glitch. systems. problem, but we’ve been missing the euro,’’ Among the systems not yet analyzed are The GAO also said the SSA faces a signifi- says Gary Johnson, an American attorney most of the 54 computer systems that oper- cant challenge in ensuring data that it ex- specializing in European securities markets. ate state disability determination services, changes with other federal and state agen- The two problems would seem to be unre- according to the GAO, the watchdog arm of cies will be year 2000 compliant. lated. But the coincidence in timing—the Congress. ‘‘Because SSA must rely on the hundreds millennium bug and the currency change ar- Those systems, which are operated by indi- of federal and state agencies and the thou- rive within a year of each other—has trans- vidual states but funded by the federal gov- sands of businesses with which it exchanges formed them into a larger, single crisis for ernment, process applicants for Supple- files to make their systems compliant, SSA many companies. The well-publicized millen- mental Security Income and Social Security faces a definite risk that inaccurate data nium-bug problem was unwittinly created by Disability Insurance, programs that cur- will be introduced into its databases,’’ the computer programmers in the 1960s. In an ef- rently assist 12.5 million people. GAO wrote.∑ fort to maximize scarce computer memory, ‘‘Disruptions to this service due to incom- programmers left the first two digits out of plete Year 2000 conversions will prevent or f the year designation, so that 1997 reads delay SSA’s assistance to millions of individ- OMNIBUS PATENT ACT OF 1997 merely ‘‘97.’’ Theoretically, when the year uals across the country,’’ Joel Willemssen, 2000 arrives, 90 percent of the world’s com- the GAO’s director of information resources ∑ Mr. BOND. Mr President, Congress puters will ‘‘think’’ it is 1900, creating all management, wrote in a report to be re- has the ‘‘power to promote the progress kinds of chaos. According to the cost con- leased today by Sen. Charles E. Grassley (R- of Science and useful Arts, by securing servative estimates, fixing the millennium Iowa) and Rep. Jim Bunning (R-Ky.). for limited times to Authors and Inven- bug will cost American business between $50 The GAO also said the Social Security Ad- tors the exclusive Right to their re- ministration has not developed adequate billion and $150 billion. spective Writings and Discoveries.’’ If BUG ZAPPER contingency plans in case its computers are not fixed in time. that phrase sounds familiar to my col- Last year, after dire warnings of a techno- The report, however, did not call into the leagues, it is because I lifted it straight logical disaster at the dawn of the new cen- question the agency’s ability to issue stand- from the Constitution. Article 1, sec- tury, companies rushed to hire programmers ard monthly Social Security checks in 2000 tion 8, known to many as the inventors to save the day. In doing so, they created a and beyond. labor shortage at a critical moment. Work clause. The SSA has long been touted as the fed- This section of the Constitution is on both the millennium bug and the euro eral agency that is most keenly aware of the transition requires knowledge of outdated year 2000 problem. The agency, whose ‘‘mis- the result of the foresight that our COBOL computer systems. So all of a sud- sion critical’’ systems collectively had been Founding Fathers had to cut a deal den, most of the programmers who might be thought to have about 34 million lines of with the creative minds of a fledgling deployed to manage the transition to the computer code, began making year 2000 re- country. The deal was rather simple, in euro already have day jobs. ‘‘There is a tre- pairs almost a decade ago. exchange for sharing their ingenuity mendous shortage of those kinds of skill As a result, SSA officials have been asked and their creations with the citizens of sets,’’ confirms Chris Fell, an executive at to hold seminars for other federal agencies this new country, the Congress would International Data corp. about the issue and have been singled out for Though the euro will be introduced in Jan- praise by Congress in the past. The new find- grant these inventors temporary mo- uary 1999, it will not become the sole cur- ings, congressional officials said, could cre- nopolies on their products and permit rency in Europe until July 1, 2002. On that ate a new round of uncertainty about the them to enjoy the proceeds of their in- date, all other currencies will be taken out federal government’s year 2000 preparedness. vention for a period of time, with the of circulation. While a large part of the U.S. ‘‘If Social Security, which we’ve thought weight of the law of the land to ensure business community remains skeptical that had everything under control, really doesn’t, those rights were protected. Europe will pull off this monetary feat, that raises new questions about other agen- This was a carefully thought out con- many companies have begun to accept that cies,’’ said a congressional staffer. it will. A few have begun to accept that it The year 2000 problem exists because most cept by rather brilliant individuals will. A few have begun to take steps. Du- large computer systems have used a two- with unquestioned foresight. In my Pont, which has a significant presence in Eu- digit dating system that assumes that 1 and opinion, this compromise has been a rope, has put together a team to prepare for 9 are the first two digits of the year. smashing success. In the past 220 years,

VerDate Mar 15 2010 22:13 Oct 24, 2013 Jkt 081600 PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\1997SENATE\S13NO7.PT2 S13NO7 mmaher on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with SOCIALSECURITY S12638 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE November 13, 1997 the United States has become an eco- venture capital markets. Should the fi- correct and courageous in their stance. nomic, industrial, and intellectual su- nancial assistance be secured, the in- Unfortunately, they have been ridi- perpower. The creative product of the ventor can build a prototype, start a culed and vilified in the press by the U.S. is unmatched the world over and I business, hire people, and perhaps even Commissioner of the PTO, the indi- believe that the United States patent build a successful company and make vidual running the agency responsible system has played a central role in this money. for licensing billions of dollars in intel- success. I believe that strong patent protec- lectual property rights here in the Why am I sharing these thoughts tion is central to that equation. First, United States. In fact, I read that he with my colleagues, because it is just those with capital are not inclined to said that the opponents of this bill, like the Federal Government to take a fork over some money because it is the good idea and turn it on its head. There nice thing to do, they want assurances that would include myself, reside on is legislation pending on the Senate of return. The legally protected monop- the lunatic fringe. He also compared Calender, with the strong backing of oly provides that assurance. The fact our sanity to that of Timothy the Clinton administration, that would that our patent laws offer the strong- McVeigh—on behalf of the hardworking gut the protection and the incentives est possible protection also contributes inventors of this country, I find such offered inventors by our patent and to that assurance. The inventor’s idea comments outrageous and demeaning. trademark laws. This country’s inven- is held in secret at the patent office But rather than dignifying those ridic- tors have been an indispensable force until it is granted, which by the way ulous comments by responding on the in the success of which I have spoken. prevents theft. The law also grants a merits, I will share with my colleagues But this legislation would tip the bal- legal right upon which an inventor can a sampling of those that Mr. Lehman is ance of protection offered by patent bring a civil action for damages should saying reside on the lunatic fringe. laws away from these inventors and that idea be infringed upon. Strong First, I have been contacted by thinkers and open them to the hostile patent protection lends value and cer- countless inventors registering their environment of intellectual property tainty to this temporary monopoly. opposition, their creations include piracy and idea predators—common- Without the patent protection, ideas medical devices, drugs, machinery, place in other parts of the world. Our that are not backed by financial re- electronic technology, computer tech- inventors will be jerked from a protec- sources may never see the light of day tive environment, known for nurturing or else they may be gobbled up by a nology, and agricultural products—to creativity and advancing practical large company for pennies on the dol- mention a few. They share a fear that knowledge, and be cast into a far lar. If one does not hold a realistic be- this will open them up to litigation, harsher arena where it will be emi- lief that they can make a go of it with theft, and harassment while closing nently more difficult for inventors to their own idea, I believe that stifles down their opportunities to continue secure their rights and enjoy the re- important incentives present in Amer- their work. I have also been contacted wards of their creativity and entrepre- ica to pursue an idea or invent. But by men and women of science, econo- neurship—and possibly be driven from even more so, I do not believe this is mists, doctors, and professors. The their work all together. the American way. This is a great most notable group of objectors is a I am hear to speak out on behalf of country because anyone with an idea group of over 20 Nobel Laureates in the inventors and the small guys of and the fortitude to pursue that idea science and economics who have signed this country. People with ideas. I can make a go it. This country is full an open letter to the U.S. Senate op- would suspect that scattered through- of companies that began under just posing the bill. These great minds all out the bill there may be some good such circumstances. agree that this legislation could result ideas that may improve the efficiency This country needs its entrepreneurs, in ‘‘lasting harm to the United States of the Patent and Trademark Office, they are essential if we are to continue and to the world.’’ They also concur but taken as a whole the changes pro- to enjoy economic growth. Think about with the concerns I am advancing posed would stifle rather than promote the role of entrepreneurs and startup today that this bill will be very harm- the sciences and the useful arts. I be- companies in our economy. They come ful to small inventors and ‘‘discourage lieve the legislation is ill-conceived up with new ideas, they promote com- the flow of new inventions that have and I will fight it should it see Senate petition, they shake up old establish- contributed so much to America’s su- ments, they force competitors to be debate. perior performance in the advancement The past couple of weeks, the Senate smart and competitive, they inject of science and technology.’’ Finally, has been debating the state of manu- vigor and dynamism into our capital- these great scientists and economists facturing in the United States. Many of istic system. They create manufac- my colleagues have registered their turing jobs right here in the United have expressed concern that this bill concern that much of our manufac- States. They create secure and well- will create a disincentive to rely on the turing base has left the country and paying jobs for Americans. And they limited life of a patent to share their they fear that this trend will continue. give you, me, and our children new creations with the public, an occur- I believe that there is a future for man- technology and news ideas for all our rence which will sap the spirit of the ufacturing and industry in this coun- use. This force is essential to our inventors clause. try. I am very encouraged by the num- strength and continued growth and the I think that opposition should be ber of small businesses and startup patent laws are essential to allowing enough to convince just about anyone. companies presently thriving in the these start-ups to begin and then But respected others, including the United States. Much of our future lies thrive. New York Times, have spoken out. The with these startup businesses and Many of those that are pushing for Times editorial page has concluded small business people that are creating this bill are large companies with vast that this bill will ‘‘dampen the innova- new technology, starting companies, financial resources. Before they put tive spirit that helps sustain the Amer- and expanding employment opportuni- forward their arguments in favor of the ican economy.’’ The Times also cor- ties. But I believe we need to seize the legislation, I must challenge them to rectly notes that the American patent opportunity and continue to encourage ask themselves some important ques- system generates more and better pat- it. tions. Did not their companies begin ent applications than any other coun- This is where the patent comes into with a single person with an idea? Did try’s, but that this bill terribly threat- the equation. A great idea can come to they not seize the opportunities offered ens the incentives present in our sys- anyone, regardless of his or her capital in this country to grow and flourish? tem that stimulates that creativity. or financial resources. This is the point Did not the patent offer protection at which the magnificence of our sys- needed to pursuing that idea? Pulling I have also been contacted by Ross tem becomes clear to me. Should a per- the ladder up once you have made it to Perot, who has expressed in no uncer- son be the first with an idea and suc- the top is not the American way, but tain terms his absolute objection to cessfully document that idea, that per- that agenda is underlying much of this this legislation. As Mr. Perot reminded son can be granted a patent. The pat- legislation. me, patents are a constitutionally ent secures a monopoly and if it is a I support the inventors who are fight- guaranteed right which have been es- good idea it can be shopped around the ing these changes. I believe they are sential to countless Americans in their

VerDate Mar 15 2010 22:13 Oct 24, 2013 Jkt 081600 PO 00000 Frm 00072 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\1997SENATE\S13NO7.PT2 S13NO7 mmaher on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with SOCIALSECURITY November 13, 1997 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S12639 fulfillment of the American dream. But Proponents are looking for changes not believe it is an accident. We in rather than celebrate this success in the system for challenges to patents, America have chosen our own path. story unique to America, we are pro- this may open small inventors to un- The goal of our patent system is to posing selling our inventors down the necessary expense and litigation. protect and reward entrepreneurs and river. Mr. Perot has called upon the Taken as a whole, there are profound innovative businesses, to encourage in- Members of Congress to ask themselves changes proposed. The collective vention and advancement of practical a simple question when considering weight, I believe, will hurt our small knowledge. The goal of many of our this bill, is it right or is it wrong? We inventors. competitor systems is to share tech- both agree it is wrong. And we are A quick word about an argument for- nology immediately, not to protect it. ready for a fight. Mr. Perot, whose warded by the bill’s proponents. They That results in preserving the cor- dedication to America and success as a will come to your office saying that porate hierarchy without giving businessman cannot be questioned, has this bill is necessary because there is a innovators the opportunity to compete. said, in the words of Isaac Hull, ‘‘If pariah lurking in the world of intellec- In other countries thoughts and ideas that fellow wants a fight, we won’t dis- tual property. He uses what is called a do not receive the level of reward that appoint him.’’ submarine patent to manipulate the they do here. The system works, let us There are other well-respected patent review process to reap unjusti- not destroy it. If we want to improve groups, small business groups and fied rewards from honest, hard-working the Patent Office, let’s get on with it. groups of concerned citizens that be- men and women. His greed and treach- But let us not organize a systematic lieve this legislation is bad policy and ery could potentially destroy thou- assault on the very system that has are lining up for a fight. sands of businesses and deal a crushing contributed so much to this country I will take the collective contribu- blow to our economy. becoming the greatest Nation on tion of those that oppose this bill and To that I respond—hogwash. Let’s en- Earth. stack them up against Mr. Lehman’s gage in an honest debate. When we in I ask that two letters and an op-ed be arguments any day. The inventors of Congress agreed to the implementing printed in the RECORD. this country should derive confidence language in the GATT agreement, we September 11, 1997. because they have the Constitution and agreed to change the U.S. patent term An Open Letter To the U.S. Senate: many great minds of science on their from a guaranteed 17 years to 20 years We urge the Senate to oppose the passage side and rhetoric on the other. from the date of filing. Supposedly, of the pending U.S. Senate Bill S. 507. We For those reviewing the bill, I would that was done to get at submarine pat- hold that Congress, before embarking on a like to point out some issues. revision of our time tested patent system, First, the proponents of the bill want ents. It does take away most if not all should hold extensive hearings on whether to create an infringement defense, of the incentive for an inventor to there are serious flaws in the present system known as a prior user right. The prior game the system and should drive a that need to be addressed and if so, how best user right is a bad idea for many rea- stake into the heart of wrongdoers. to deal with them. This is especially impor- sons. Foremost, it starts down a road In the process we made a tremendous tant considering that a delicate structure sacrifice that will cost many of our in- such as the patent system, with all its rami- that changes our ‘‘first to invent’’ sys- fications, should not be subject to frequent tem and overturns 200 years of U.S. ventors patent protection. Today, for each day beyond 3 years that a patent modifications. We believe that S. 507 could patent policy. The defense would not result in lasting harm to the United States only permit inventors to keep their lingers in the patent office, our inven- and the world. ideas secret, but it encourages them to tors will lose a day of patent protec- First, it will prove very damaging to keep them secret. Our first to invent tion. Should someone invent a better American small inventors and thereby dis- system protects small inventors. If potato peeler or candy wrapper, it courage the flow of new inventions that have they document their invention, they probable won’t be in the office today. contributed so much to America’s superior But the change could have a significant performance in the advancement of Science will not have to engage in a race to the and technology. It will do so by curtailing patent office. They will have time to affect on those attempting to get a pat- ent on breakthrough technology. Such the protection they obtain through patents tinker and perfect their inventions relative to the large multi-national corpora- without being forced to file early and technology can often stay under review tions. then file for all perfections, a costly in the office for years and subsequently Second, the principle of prior user rights process for a small inventor. our inventors have lost years of protec- saps the very spirit of that wonderful insti- The defense will hurt small inventors tion compared with what they enjoyed tution that is represented by the American in the capital markets because it will before the change. Our inventors have patent system established in the Constitu- undermine the certainty of the patent. made a great sacrifice to root out the tion in 1787, which is based on the principle As I said this certainty is important to wrongdoers in the system. But the pro- that the inventor is given complete protec- tion but for a limited length of time, after attracting capital and the capital is ponents of this bill want more. They do have more. The PTO has a which the patent, fully disclosed in the ap- important for underfunded inventors to plication and published at the time of issue, take their products to market. Should computer system designed to track becomes in the public domain, and can be one have an invention that requires ex- patent applications that appear to be used by anyone, under competitive condi- pensive testing, the idea can not be those of one attempting to game the tions for the benefit of all final users. It will perfected without finances. Capital is system. The Commissioner also has the do so by giving further protection to trade essential for inventors to role out their power to order that the application of secrets which can be kept secret forever, own ideas. This section poses many one attempting to game the system is while reducing the incentive to rely on lim- problems about which I could speak for published, further curtailing the possi- ited life patents. quite some time, but I will refrain. The bility of the submarine patents. Fi- Nobel Laureates in support of the letter to con- reasons will be aired fully in time. nally, the Commissioner himself has gress, re: Senate Bill 507 Many proponents want to force all said that only 1 percent of 1 percent of Franco Modigliani, (1985, Economics) MIT. inventors to publish their ideas after 18 patent applications could be considered Robert Solow, (1987, Economics) MIT. Mario Molina, (1995, Chemistry) MIT. months, regardless of whether the pat- submarine patents. Roald Hoffman, (1981, Chemistry) Cornell. ent review process is completed. Some The Commissioner has plenty of tools Milton Friedman, (1976, Economics) Uni- changes have been made to scale this at his disposal to curb this problem if versity of Chicago. back, but many are laying in wait to it in fact exists. If the problem is out of Richard Smalley, (1996, Chemistry) Rice. see this implemented. I believe this control, then I believe the problem lies Clifford Shull, (1994, Physics) MIT. would open our inventors to theft. with the Commissioner and those with Herbert A. Simon, (1978, Economics) Car- Small inventors would have to go to complaints would be better served lev- negie-Mellon. court to recoup their just rewards and eling their concerns at the other end of Douglass North, (1993, Economics) Wash- would have to depend on costly litiga- ington University. Pennsylvania Avenue. Dudley Herschbach, (1986, Chemistry) Har- tion. Many say, ‘‘We won’t steal I will conclude by saying that bril- vard. ideas,’’ I hope not, but this is the busi- liant minds have been drawn to this Herbert C. Brown, (1979, Chemistry) Pur- ness world. I am unwilling to put small country and the brilliant minds native due. inventors at this sort of a risk. to this country have flourished. I do David M. Lee, (1996, Physics) Cornell.

VerDate Mar 15 2010 22:13 Oct 24, 2013 Jkt 081600 PO 00000 Frm 00073 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\1997SENATE\S13NO7.PT2 S13NO7 mmaher on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with SOCIALSECURITY S12640 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE November 13, 1997 Daniel Nathans, (1978, Medicine) Johns Using their brains, wits, and creativity as will be forced to defend their actions in their Hopkins. a substitute for money, they successfully 1998 campaigns. It will be a major Constitu- Doug Osheroff, (1996, Physics) Stanford. created this new product and now hold over tional violation issue in the 2000 campaigns. Har Gobind Khorana, (1968, Medicine) MIT. 25 patents. Isn’t it time for our elected officials to Herbert Hauptman, (1985, Chemistry) John Deere purchased the technologies and stop debating whether their actions are legal Hauptman-Woodward Medical Research In- patent rights for several million dollars. or illegal, and ask only one question, ‘‘Is it stitute. I had the privilege of showing 4,000 Future right or wrong?’’ John C. Harsanyi, (1994, Economics) UC Farmers of America a videotape of their Finally, before voting for this Bill, ask Berkeley. great work. These teenagers were electrified, every member of the House and Senate who Paul Berg, (1980, Chemistry) Stanford. because Ralph’s and Mark’s success made plan to vote for this Bill, to read the words Henry Kendall, (1990, Physics) MIT. these young people realize that it is still pos- of Isaac Hull, Captain of the U.S.S. Constitu- Paul Samuelson, (1970, Economics) MIT. sible to dream great dreams in America and tion, Old Ironsides—‘‘If that fellow wants a James Tobin, (1981, Economics) Yale. make those dreams come true. fight, we won’t disappoint him.’’ Jerome Friedman, (1990, Physics) MIT. Again, thank you for your leadership— Sidney Altman, (1989, Chemistry) Yale. Can’t we agree that inventors should not Robert F. Curl, (1996, Chemistry) Rice. have their Constitutional rights violated and thank you for your courage—thank you for William Sharpe, (1990, Economics) Stan- they should be paid for their creative ideas standing on principle. ford. and inventions? Sincerely, Merton Miller, (1990, Economics) U. of Chi- Patent rights and the creativity and inge- ROSS PEROT. cago. nuity of United States inventors have been instrumental in giving the United States our [From the New York Times, Oct. 17, 1997] REFORM PARTY world leadership. A BAD PATENT BILL OF THE UNITED STATES, Why is this happening? Because our large The Senate is considering a misguided bill Dallas, TX, November 4, 1997. corporations, foreign governments, and for- to recast the patent laws in ways that would Hon. CHRISTOPHER S. BOND, eign companies who contributed millions of threaten small inventors and dampen the in- Russell Building, Senate Office Building, U.S. dollars to the 1996 political campaigns want novative spirit that helps sustain America’s Senate, Washington, DC. to steal our inventors’ new patents. If you economy. The bill is so mischievous that it DEAR SENATOR BOND: I want to thank you question this statement, get a list of the has attracted an unusual coalition of oppo- personally for having the courage and integ- companies working to lobby this change nents—including the icon of of liberal econo- rity to oppose the Patent Bill now pending through Congress. mists, Paul Samuelson, the icon of conserv- before Congress—Senate Bill 507. This Bill Patents are property rights under U.S. ative economists, Milton Friedman, and 26 will destroy our patent system and remove Law. It is immoral and inexcusable for large other Nobel Prize-winning scientists and all incentives for people to create revolu- corporations to band together and spend a economists. tionary new products. fortune trying to lobby this Bill secretly Patent laws currently require inventors to In addition, I would like to thank Senate through Congress, so that the creative ideas disclose their secrets in return for the exclu- Majority Leader Trent Lott for standing on of United States inventors can literally be sive right to market their product for up to principle and refusing to allow this bill to be stolen. 20 years. Early disclosure helps the economy sneaked through the Senate without hear- Why don’t these people admit that what by putting new ideas immediately into the ings or debate. they are trying to get done is no better than hands of people who, for a fee to the patent Obviously, some members of the Senate robbing a bank. In fact, it is even worse to holder, find novel and commercially applica- feel that the owners of the country—the peo- steal an individual’s inventions so that com- ble uses for these ideas. Extended protection, ple—have no right to know what Congress is panies can increase corporate profits. meanwhile, provides a huge incentive for in- doing. If this is such a good idea, why has this ventors to keep inventing. The American Under this law, inventors’ new products whole process been carried out behind closed system generates more and better patent ap- still pending approval, will be made avail- doors in Congress, with people supporting plications than any other country’s. able to all nations, with many countries this Bill doing everything they can to avoid The Senate bill would weaken patent pro- shamelessly mass-producing these products public debates on the floor of the House and tection for small inventors by requiring in- and ignoring the inventors’ rights. Senate? ventors who file for both American and for- The only recourse for the inventor is to pe- The answer it is cannot stand the harsh eign patents to publish their secrets 18 tition the newly created World Trade Organi- light of public scrutiny. months after filing rather than when the zation, where our country only has one I want to thank you and every member of patent is issued. Small inventors say that unweighted—and believe it or not, the inven- the House and Senate who have stood up to premature publication gives away their se- tor has no recourse in the United States the tremendous pressure you are subjected cret if their application fails. It would also court system. Does anybody really think to. I know that many of you have been allow large corporations with the financial that this complies with our Constitution? threatened about what the special interests muscle to fend off subsequent legal chal- Granting patent rights to inventors is a will do to you in the next election. You are lenges to maneuver around the patent even if Constitutional right—clearly spelled out in living Commodore Maury’s words—‘‘When it is later issued. our Constitution in Article I, Section 8. principle is involved, be deaf to expediency.’’ Worse, the bills would encourage corpora- Please remind every member of Congress Just let these people know that all the spe- tions to avoid the patent process altogether. that it is illegal to amend the Constitution cial interest money in the world is not worth Under current law, companies that rely on by passing laws. one penny unless it will buy the votes of the unpatented trade secrets run the risk that The only way the Constitution can be American people. I, and millions of other someone else will patent their invention and amended is through the amendment process. Americans who share your concerns over charge them royalties. The Senate bill would Isn’t this a whole lot better than leaving it Constitutional rights and protecting our in- permit companies whose trade secrets are up to the lobbyists, foreign governments, ventors’ great new ideas, will be working later patented by someone else to continue and corporations? The framers of the Con- night and day to see that people who have to market their products without paying stitution knew what they were doing. Let’s the character and integrity to stand up to royalties. Encouraging corporations to hide follow the rules. this tremendous pressure are overwhelm- secrets is the opposite of what an economy Congress has no business even thinking ingly re-elected. that relies on information needs. about circumventing the Constitution with a I challenge the people supporting this Bill Pesky patent holders do in fact get in the combination of federal law and international to come out of the closet, face the American way of large corporations. But the economy trade agreements. people, and have an open debate on this thrives on independent initiative. Small in- What would our country and the world be issue, but I won’t hold my breath waiting for ventors need ironclad patent protection so like today if Robert Fulton has not invented them to do it. That is not the way they oper- that they are not forced into a legal scrum the steam engine, Thomas Edison had not in- ate, and they will all be embarrassed if they with financial giants. The House of Rep- vented the electric light, Alexander Graham attempt to do it. resentatives and the Senate Judiciary Com- Bell had not invented the telephone and I will pay for the television time to allow mittee approved the patent bill without made instant worldwide communication pos- a national debate on this issue. The only hearing the country’s leading economists sible, The Wright brothers had not invented problem we will have is that the people who and scientists make their case. Senate spon- the airplane, Edwin Armstrong had not har- are for this Bill will not show up, because it sors now say they will try. Congress needs to nessed the airways and made radio and tele- cannot withstand the light of public scru- hear the critics out before proceeding to any vision possible, Jack Kilby and Robert Noyce tiny, and they will pressure the television more votes.∑ had not invented the integrated circuit, just networks not to sell the time. to mention a few. If this Bill passes, A Constitutional lawsuit f A few years ago two young men, Ralph will be filed immediately. Foreign nations CONNECTICUT TEACHER OF THE Lagergren and Mark Underwood, from Kan- and corporations will know that the 21st YEAR sas had revolutionary ideas about how to im- Century pirates for hire reside in the U.S. prove the combine used to harvest grain. Congress. Those who vote for it will be paid ∑ Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I rise They had great ideas, but no money. off handsomely. The people who voted for it today to offer congratulations to an

VerDate Mar 15 2010 22:13 Oct 24, 2013 Jkt 081600 PO 00000 Frm 00074 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\1997SENATE\S13NO7.PT2 S13NO7 mmaher on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with SOCIALSECURITY