Gene [Quinn] is right<\/a>,” Matal said. “The bill is clearly beneficial, clearly pro-patent. People need to stop listening to US Inventor.”<\/p>\nJones, whose members include companies like Microsoft, Amazon, Intel and Google, does not support PERA as written, but said there could be a way to get to consensus if stakeholders would agree to options such as offering sui generis<\/em> protection for specific types of inventions or other concessions. Overall though, he said the current state of U.S. patent policy is \u201cmixed but probably mostly positive\u201d for his members.<\/p>\nLee noted the House IP Subcommittee will also be examining issues such as artificial intelligence, oversight of the Copyright Office standard essential patents and counterfeiting in the coming days and weeks.<\/p>\n
Stay tuned for more news from Day 2 of IPWatchdog LIVE.<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"On day two of IPWatchdog LIVE, J. John Lee, Chief Counsel for Intellectual Property for the U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on the Judiciary, told those who are skeptical of the chances for Senators\u2019 Tillis and Coons\u2019 Patent Eligibility Restoration Act (PERA) to move forward that a House version of the bill is likely to be introduced in the near future. Lee, who is principal advisor on IP issues and helms the Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet, was speaking on a panel titled \u201cPolitics, Policy and Legislation at the Intersection of Intellectual Property,\u201d which also featured David Jones of the High-Tech Inventors Alliance; Joe Matal of Haynes Boone, LLP and former U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) Acting Director and Acting Solicitor; and Eli Mazour of Harrity & Harrity.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":109908,"featured_media":166873,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"content-type":"","footnotes":"","_links_to":"","_links_to_target":""},"categories":[274,5519,262,228,3,6555,37020,41],"tags":[8753,7204,13853,38,49,72685,74429,1599,4106,74998,74986,4313,8727],"yst_prominent_words":[21528,23668,15265,16029,37920,17848,15244,54502,31446],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/ipwatchdog.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/166872"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/ipwatchdog.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/ipwatchdog.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ipwatchdog.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/109908"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ipwatchdog.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=166872"}],"version-history":[{"count":6,"href":"https:\/\/ipwatchdog.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/166872\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":166887,"href":"https:\/\/ipwatchdog.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/166872\/revisions\/166887"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ipwatchdog.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/166873"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/ipwatchdog.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=166872"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ipwatchdog.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=166872"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ipwatchdog.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=166872"},{"taxonomy":"yst_prominent_words","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ipwatchdog.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/yst_prominent_words?post=166872"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}