 | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
I've felt for several months that it's time for a Wikipedia entry on Peer to Patent. It has set down roots with its pilot at the USPTO, which represents an historic evolution in policy-making that is certain to be cited by future attempts to engage the public in discourse with government bodies. The project has been featured in the Washington Post, Forbes, the Economist, Technology Review, Wired Magazine, Science Magazine, and Nature Magazine, and has been highlighted on National Public Radio's Science Friday. (Disclosure: I wrote the article in the Economist.) Thus, it has significant coverage in reliable sources. Further establishing the criterion of long-term notability, Peer to Patent is widely known among people interested in the patent system, as shown by repeated features on Dennis Crouch's Patently Obvious (Patently-O) blog, and has had an impact on policy discussions in the area of patenting.
A few of the criteria in the Evaluation section could use clarification. For instance, there's no indication of what measurement will be used to evaluate the "Success rate for reviewers" or "The utility of prior art examples provided to patent examiners." Furthermore, the "Demographics of reviewer pool" should be specified--for instance, does it include educational level and job category? Andrew Oram, Editor, O'Reilly Media, http://praxagora.com/andyo/ 13:52, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
Isn't it stated somewhere that half of all patents that get challenged in the US are overturned? (I don't know whether this statistic refers to court challenges, re-examinations by the patent office, or both.) Dig up the statistic and include it in the "Justification and purpose" section where it talks about, "the large number of patents that get overturned..." Andrew Oram, Editor, O'Reilly Media, http://praxagora.com/andyo/ 04:01, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
Is it worth referring to the USPTO document that describes the legal basis for working on the Peer to Patent pilot? Andrew Oram, Editor, O'Reilly Media, http://praxagora.com/andyo/ 13:55, 15 November 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by AndrewOram (talk • contribs)
Article clean up
editI've begun a bit of article clean up. No offense to prior editors. Feel free to join in. Overall, the article needs more references, particularly for the speculatory assertions therein. We should only include specuations that other authorities have published.--Nowa (talk) 13:24, 18 July 2008 (UTC)