4 ms·

'But, as usual, government employees/agencies have “sovereign immunity”, which means they can get away with doing a bad job any other type of private employee w

'But, as usual, government employees/agencies have “sovereign immunity”, which means they can get away with doing a bad job any other type of private employee would get fired for, without repercussions.' It's not too clear what you mean by this. Patent examiners can get fired, right? Or are they elected/appointed for life in your country's system?

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
sebastien_b 6y ago
They're immune from being sued in the way I described - so they can essentially cause (monetary) harm to someone else (in this case, the victim of a patent troll), even if inadvertent, and it can be proven that the work they (the PTO et al.) did is invalid (patent gets invalidated), but still get off scott free while the victim ends up with all the costs of cleaning up the mess the PTO created. Yes, they can get 'fired' - I was simply meaning that they can screw up a patent application so badly (letting it be accepted when it should not) without repercussions, where that type of screwup would get non-government employees fired (probably for lesser screwups, too).
- minitoar 6y ago
  I’d imagine they’re not completely immune, eg if you can demonstrate criminal intent the immunity probably doesn’t apply.
  - appleflaxen 6y ago
    insight 10 relevance 0
    - minitoar 6y ago
      Thanks for the response. Care to elaborate?
      - Dylan16807 6y ago
        They're saying that there is nothing even resembling criminal intent in this sort of patent problem, so your statement is true but not related to the problem at hand.
        0_gravitas 6y ago
        would have been preferable if they put it in better terms, i feel like the quality of comments on hn have been getting lower and lower and there fewer and fewer calling them out/flagging them when they're there
  - NautilusWave 6y ago
    Qualified immunity is a mess; to sue a government worker for something they did on the job, a court would have had to of previously found, in a different case, that said something was unconstitutional, IIRC.
    - sebastien_b 6y ago
      "Qualified immunity" - thank you, that's what I meant to write, not 'sovereign immunity'.
- pbhjpbhj 6y ago
  Patents being invalidated doesn't mean the work done was invalid. A public disclosure, for example, that there was no practical way for an examiner to be aware of, could invalidate a patent. Unless omniscience is part of the job requirements you're going to be sorely disappointed. Examiners don't make applications, applicants do. Very expensive lawyers do their best to get those patent applications granted. Sometimes the lawyers/applicant know that the final product is invalid but seek it anyway .. so someone harmed can seek restitution from the courts. The PTO try to stop mess, they don't screw up applications, they tear down applications; they unfortunately can't practically be 100% effective in that. I'm sure they could do better, buy you appear to require them to be perfect? Again, these comments are my own. I work in IP, but not in USA and not with USPTO.
  - sebastien_b 6y ago
    > The PTO try to stop mess, they don't screw up applications, they tear down applications; Well they don't "tear down" enough of them to prevent the useless patent trolling that other companies and the taxpayers are burdened with to clean up.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

sebastien_b 6y ago

They're immune from being sued in the way I described - so they can essentially cause (monetary) harm to someone else (in this case, the victim of a patent troll), even if inadvertent, and it can be proven that the work they (the PTO et al.) did is invalid (patent gets invalidated), but still get off scott free while the victim ends up with all the costs of cleaning up the mess the PTO created. Yes, they can get 'fired' - I was simply meaning that they can screw up a patent application so badly (letting it be accepted when it should not) without repercussions, where that type of screwup would get non-government employees fired (probably for lesser screwups, too).

minitoar 6y ago
I’d imagine they’re not completely immune, eg if you can demonstrate criminal intent the immunity probably doesn’t apply.
- appleflaxen 6y ago
  insight 10 relevance 0
  - minitoar 6y ago
    Thanks for the response. Care to elaborate?
    - Dylan16807 6y ago
      They're saying that there is nothing even resembling criminal intent in this sort of patent problem, so your statement is true but not related to the problem at hand.
      - 0_gravitas 6y ago
        would have been preferable if they put it in better terms, i feel like the quality of comments on hn have been getting lower and lower and there fewer and fewer calling them out/flagging them when they're there
- NautilusWave 6y ago
  Qualified immunity is a mess; to sue a government worker for something they did on the job, a court would have had to of previously found, in a different case, that said something was unconstitutional, IIRC.
  - sebastien_b 6y ago
    "Qualified immunity" - thank you, that's what I meant to write, not 'sovereign immunity'.
pbhjpbhj 6y ago
Patents being invalidated doesn't mean the work done was invalid. A public disclosure, for example, that there was no practical way for an examiner to be aware of, could invalidate a patent. Unless omniscience is part of the job requirements you're going to be sorely disappointed. Examiners don't make applications, applicants do. Very expensive lawyers do their best to get those patent applications granted. Sometimes the lawyers/applicant know that the final product is invalid but seek it anyway .. so someone harmed can seek restitution from the courts. The PTO try to stop mess, they don't screw up applications, they tear down applications; they unfortunately can't practically be 100% effective in that. I'm sure they could do better, buy you appear to require them to be perfect? Again, these comments are my own. I work in IP, but not in USA and not with USPTO.
- sebastien_b 6y ago
  > The PTO try to stop mess, they don't screw up applications, they tear down applications; Well they don't "tear down" enough of them to prevent the useless patent trolling that other companies and the taxpayers are burdened with to clean up.