---
layout: post
title: Protect Inter Partes Review -- My Response to PTO-P-2025-0025
tags:
 - Intellectual Property Law
 - Open Source
---

I oppose the USPTO’s proposed rule changes for inter partes review (IPR), [Docket No. PTO-P-2025-0025](https://www.regulations.gov/document/PTO-P-2025-0025-0001/comment). 

Patents are a critical tool for enabling/protecting innovators, but that very protection backfires when bad actors -- so called "patent trolls" -- hamper innovation by registering/defending patents used primarily to pressure small entrepreneurs into paying a license fee to avoid the threat of costly litigation. The accessibility and cost effectiveness of IPR compared to federal litigation enables organizations like the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) to effectively fight for small software developers like me and provide us with peace of mind from these threats when building unique and novel innovations.

I appreciate that the proposal seeks to protect small businesses who "are especially harmed by weakened patent rights". BUT, I'm seriously concerned by the proposal to restrict IPR in the face of legal activity elsewhere. Each entity harmed by a bad patent should be able to voice their objections.

I appreciate the desire to dissuade "a large company [which] believes it can invalidate [a] patent through multiple validity challenges". BUT, I'm seriously concerned that this proposal enables well-resourced organizations to orchestrate a weak patent challenge to entrench their position as the owner of a bad patent. I urge the USPTO to consider multiple challenges of the same patent from disparate groups -- including challenges with substantially similar facts -- as signals of a problem rather than distracting noise. Prefer consolidation of similar challenges into one decision over prohibitions on raising those challenges.

Strong protections for strong patents are critical for strong innovation. Strong protections for weak patents critically weaken innovation. Please remember to choose rules that protect individuals and small businesses from both directions.

> Thank you to [GitHub](https://github.blog/news-insights/policy-news-and-insights/developers-still-need-the-right-to-challenge-junk-patents/) and the [Electronic Frontier Foundation](https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2025/12/eff-tells-patent-office-dont-cut-public-out-patent-review) for raising awareness of these proposed rule changes.
{: .prompt-info }
