“Why are these people giving testimony to Congress on patent reform?”
On Thursday, July 13th, the House Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property and the Internet held yet another one-sided hearing on the topic of patent reform. Although one panel witness was able to provide substantive commentary on ways to balance the current iteration of the U.S. patent system, a good deal of that day’s discussion was railroaded by meaningless puffery on “patent trolls” provided by poor panel choices.
…“It’s only thanks to a strongly anti-troll board and executive leadership that I’m able to be here today,” Lee’s testimony reads. It seems really questionable why Mapbox would want Lee testifying on viewpoints related to patents when he seemingly has very little knowledge of Mapbox’s own patenting activities. This is made evident by a Twitter exchange between Lee and Justin Cohen, IP litigator and partner at Thompson & Knight. Lee responded to Cohen multiple times indicating that he couldn’t be specific about Mapbox’s filing activities and that the firm doesn’t disclose details (despite the fact that such activities are publicly available information); Cohen noted that this was odd given the fact that Lee testified about Mapbox’s patent application filing activities in Congress and yet couldn’t be specific about them on Twitter.