Has anybody paid attention (meaning read the bill S 23) to this so called "patent reform" which would switch the system to a first to file system. What difference does it make? There is no way you can reform the patent system unless you dramatically reduce the time involved (i.e. copyright to 3-5 years say, and patents the same time). I ideally wouldn't mind getting rid of the entire system all together but since it is a highly unrealistic scenario (because most people don't understand the difference between scarce property and so called "rights" to abstract value), I would prefer to lobby tp drmamaticaly reduce the categories available for patent protection. But this probably makes no sense because what should we protect? Perhaps nothing?
Hypothetically, what would we see if congress abolished all the DMCA act 1996, trademark protection and trademark dilution? More importantly, what kind of savings would we see when we buy electronics and other products governed by patent costs? In fact, what is the embedded cost in the good or service due to retaining patent attorneys, frivolous patent lawsuits, filing fees, etc? Can it be measured? How about trademark costs i.e. coca cola, AT&T?
Also, with free trade agreements, there are all sorts of clauses that give IP protection to very dubious things (CAFTA, patent protection for sports moves). Since IP has been so expanded beyond question, has there been anything that hasn't been given patent or copyright or trademark protection.
Ideas appreciated.