Breakfast with a presidential candidate

[Bruce Dawson]

On Tue, 2004-01-06 at 10:49, bmcculley at rcn.com wrote:
> Real issue is leveling the playing field, so small business
> can continue (or start?) to thrive and prosper.  Small
> business and individuals generate most of the new wealth,
> allowing larger businesses to rip off the results is bad
> fiscal and social policy.  

I think leveling the playing field is the real issue here. (Thanks!)
Unfortunately, Republicans will always take the side of big business
(which is where the "leveling" needs to be), and Democrats will want the
government to do something, (which implies more taxes/regulation).

So, I guess this is a good one for the candidate. We'll see how much
depth he has!

> There might be an interesting opportunity for a distinctive
> proposal here = loser pays has been suggested as a tort reform
> but maybe applying it to IP law would be a useful antidote to
> abusive patents.  In a patent contest, if the patent is
> invalidated make the holder of the invalidated patent liable
> for the costs of defending any infringement action they initiated.
> 
> I like the loser pays tort reform, but politically it's dead
> meat, however limiting it to IP cases might make it
> acceptable.  It would at least be a proposal that would have
> value and seems to have little downside for a serious candidate.
> 
> Anyone care to comment?

Hmmm. This doesn't require legislation, which is good. Who controls the
PTO? Executive or legislative branch? (Implied: how does one find these
things out?)

Thanks for the feedback. With any luck, he'll listen!

--Bruce
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/private/gnhlug-discuss/attachments/20040106/e970401b/attachment.bin