1 / 18

Kathleen M. Kaplan, D.Sc. Assistant Professor

The 6th International Conference on Military and Aerospace Programmable Logic Devices Ronald Reagan Building and International Trade Center, Washington D.C., USA September 9, 2003 - September 11, 2003.

dandre
Download Presentation

Kathleen M. Kaplan, D.Sc. Assistant Professor

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The 6th International Conference on Military and Aerospace Programmable Logic Devices Ronald Reagan Building and International Trade Center, Washington D.C., USA September 9, 2003 - September 11, 2003 Giving Away Advanced Technology: Intellectual Property in Military and Aerospace Programmable Logic Devices Kathleen M. Kaplan, D.Sc.Assistant Professor Dept. of Systems & Computer ScienceHoward Universitykkaplan@howard.edu Lt Col John J. Kaplan (Ph.D., J.D.) USAFCommander of the 694th Support Squadron Kaplan

  2. Problem • The digital age has resulted in new ways for non-U.S. entities to secure information regarding technology, including technology concerning Military and Aerospace Programmable Logic. • In order to provide more open access to the public, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has become web-based; the USPTO now publishes all of its patents from 1976 to the current year on its website, http://www.uspto.gov. • While this is helpful to inventors and others, it gives foreigners an advantage that they did not have previously: the ability to obtain U.S. detailed technical knowledge at the click of a mouse. Kaplan

  3. Pre-Web USPTO • Previously, patents had to be requested from the USPTO, by mail or in person. • While individual patents could be obtained by anyone, it was previously not as quick and easy. • The requester would have to either submit a request in writing or physically be present in the USPTO to receive a given patent. Kaplan

  4. Pre-Web USPTO These measures gave layers of protection for technology: • By accessing the United States itself and then the USPTO. • By supplying forwarding addresses that may identify the recipients. • By requiring fees in requesting the information. • By the physical retrieving of the patents by the USPTO for shipment or review. Kaplan

  5. Current State of Patent Publication • The USPTO publishes patents on-line. • Patent applications may be published after eighteen months of the filing date (required by the American Inventors Protection Act (AIPA) of 1999, Public Law 106-113). http://www.uspto.gov Kaplan

  6. Publishing Patent Applications - Exceptions • When a pending patent is subject to a secrecy order. • When initiated by the applicant if the invention disclosed in the application has not and will not be the subject of an application filed in another country, or under a multilateral international agreement, that requires eighteen-month publication. Kaplan

  7. USPTO Security Measure “Whenever the publication … of an invention … might, in the opinion of the Commissioner of Patents, be detrimental to the national security, he shall make the application for patent … available for inspection to [appropriate officials]. If the agency concludes that disclosure of the invention would be detrimental to the national security ... the Commissioner then issues a Secrecy Order and withholds the publication … for such period as the national interest requires.” From the USPTO’s Manual of Patent Examining Procedure. Kaplan

  8. Secrecy Order – Not Enough! The Commissioner of Patents has an opinion that a specific patent might contain specific information which might be detrimental to the national security. It is the authors’ contention is that all of our technical information is important to national security and should not be handed out so freely. Kaplan

  9. A Security Problem Example A USPTO website search with “programmable logic device” yielded 3,256 patents and 1,529 patent applications. Therefore, anyone with internet access can view technical details of 4,785 inventions and proposed inventions about programmable logic devices. Kaplan

  10. Patent number 6,016,563 “Method and apparatus for testing a logic design of a programmable logic device Part of the abstract states: “An apparatus and method are provided for the development, testing and verification of a logic design of a programmable logic device in a real-time user environment to simplify the development of the programmable logic device and associated systems … The apparatus may further include an embedded programmable stimulus generator and an embedded logic analyzer.” Sounds interesting… Kaplan

  11. Also listed on patent 6,016,563 Inventor: Fl******; Evgeny G. (**** ******* Dr., San Jose, CA 9***9) (We put asterisks (*) instead of the actual characters which are found on-line!) Should we go to his home? Remember, this is public information conveniently supplied by the USPTO on-line! • How convenient for our competitors! • They not only have PLD technology but also information on the inventor for recruiting purposes! Kaplan

  12. Changes The open-access to the entire patent system via the internet must be changed: • Some information should remain open-access. • The remaining information should be secured and accessed in a different way. Kaplan

  13. Open-Access Information The only open-access, on-line information should be the patent: • Name • Number • Filing date • Issue date • Assignee • Abstract Kaplan

  14. Information to be Secured The remainder, including the inventors’ names, addresses, and detailed specification and claims should not be available by open-access on-line. Kaplan

  15. A Possible Solution The authors suggest the USPTO initiate a registration system whereby a person can request registration with the USPTO and, if approved, the person would receive a password. Once registered, the registrant will be able to access full-text patents. Kaplan

  16. USPTO Registration The registration process would include a preliminary background check prior to issuance of a password. This would: • Control access to the patents, and • Allow the USPTO to track the patent accesses. Therefore, authorities could investigate non-obviousrelationships between patent access and possible threats. For example, if an individual is accessing patents dealing with explosives and chemicals, a flag may be sent to a patent security office. Kaplan

  17. Progress of Science The USPTO should investigate different ways of safeguarding technology. However, safeguarding technology must be balanced against the progress of science. The progress of science is a critical aspect of the patent system whereby the public gains detailed knowledge of the invention in return for giving the inventor the exclusive right to exclude others from the patent. Kaplan

  18. Thank You! Questions? Kaplan

More Related