S.284
To restore the term of patents, and for other purposes.
| Sponsors and Co-Sponsors |
| Thomas Legislative Information |
Companion House Bill H.R.359
01/26/1995 Inroduced in Senate
07/03/1995 - Robert H. Rines, Skip Kaltenheuser - The Connecticut Law Tribune
Lawyers advising U.S. players on the world business stage should understand the importance of strong intellectual property protection for America's entire innovative community. Yet some define their clients' interestsso narrowly that they regard U.S. patent strengths as @ chits to be swapped for marginal gains abroad.
Such was the case last year when the term of U.S. patents, in less than democratic spirit, was slipped into the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) implementing legislation for a fast-track up or down vote on the entire package. The U.S. term was changed from 17 years from the date of the patent grant to 20 years from the date of the application filing. GATT, however, requires only a minimum of 20 years from filing. Though California Republican Rep. Dana Rohrbacher's proposed bill - H.R.- 359 which had 177 cosponsors across the full political spectrum, Congress has the chance to strengthen the U.S. term to 17 years from grant or to 20 years from filing, whichever is longer, without impeding GATT.
More...
10/01/1995 - Alliance for American Innovation
The Administration promised Senator Dole in writing that they would not oppose legislation to restore the patent patent term to the historical term of 17 years from issuance if Senator Dole voted for the GATT implementing legislation. As a result of this commitment, Senator Dole voted for the GATT implementing legislation and Senator Dole introduced S. 284, a bill to restore the term of patents. S. 284 is the Senate version of H.R. 359 introduced in the House early in January, 1995. Now, in complete disregard for the written commitment to Senator Dole, the Patent Office is distributing an official document entitled Administrative Comments on H.R.359/S.284 to oppose the restoration of the patent term. Even worse, this official document is fraught with many absurd statements that are totally untrue or are insidious half-truths.
More...
09/27/1995 - American Council on Education
On behalf of the American Council on Education (ACE) representing over 1,8W colleges and universities, we are pleased to provide our views on H.R. 359 and S. 284.
Many of our member institutions participate in go government - university - industry partnerships that Involve the transfer of university technology to industry and small business. These relationships have been extremely beneficial to all concerned.
More...
08/11/1995 - American Bar Association
Although belated, the American Small Businesses Association casts its support for S. 284. Recently we became aware of the provisions of GATT that will adversely affect Americain technology development worldwide. We applaud the provisions of S. 284 and H.R. 359 that will correct the unfair patent provisions of the GATT legislation passed by the 103rd Congress. More...04/18/1995 - Council on Government Relations
The Council on Governmental Relations, an association of 137 research intensive universities with a focus on regulatory compliance, and three other prominent national associations of higher education are writing to express support for H.R. 359, introduced by you for the purpose of patent term restoration and patent disclosure. We are also aware. of and we endorse the companion bill (S. 284) introduced by Senator Dole. More...