[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 153 (2007), Part 17]
[House]
[Pages 23474-23479]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                          AMERICAN PATENT LAW

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 18, 2007, the gentleman from California (Mr. Rohrabacher) is 
recognized for 60 minutes.
  Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Speaker, tonight I would like to raise a red 
flag to draw attention, the attention of my fellow Members, who are 
here assembled, as well as those listening on C-SPAN and those who will 
be reading this in the Congressional Record.
  On Friday, legislation is scheduled to come to the floor of the House 
that will have a huge impact on the American people, yet it is 
receiving little attention. What is it? It is a proposal to 
dramatically diminish a constitutionally protected right by 
fundamentally altering America's patent system.
  If H.R. 1908, the bill in question, passes, there will be tremendous 
long-term negative consequences for our country.
  Patent law is thought to be so complicated and esoteric that most 
people tune out once they realize that's what the subject is. Yet our 
technological genius and the laws protecting and promoting that genius 
have been at the heart of America's success as a Nation. America's 
technological edge has permitted the American people to have the 
highest standard of living in the world and permitted our country to 
sail safely through troubled waters, the troubled waters of world wars 
and international threats.

                              {time}  2300

  American technology has made all the difference. And it is the 
American patent law that has determined what technology, what level of 
technology development that America has had. Protecting individual 
rights, even of the little guy, has been the hallmark of our country. 
Patent rights, the right to own one's creation, are one of those rights 
that are written into the United States Constitution. In fact, Benjamin 
Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, George Washington and others, all our 
Founding Fathers were not only people that believed in freedom, but 
they also believed in technology and the potential of American genius. 
Visit Monticello and see what Thomas Jefferson did with the time after 
he penned the words of the Declaration of Independence and after he 
served as President of the United States. He went back to Monticello 
and he spent his time inventing things, inventing pieces of equipment 
and technologies that would lift the burden from the shoulders of 
labor.
  And then there was Benjamin Franklin, again, a man who participated 
in the Declaration of Independence as well as the Constitution. He was 
the inventor of the bifocal. He was the inventor of the stove that kept 
people warm. Until then people only had fireplaces. He had many other 
inventions to his name. Yet he was also a man, one of our cherished 
Founding Fathers, who helped us create this free Nation. He believed in 
freedom and technology and believed that with freedom and technology we 
could increase the standard of living of our people, not just the 
elite, but of all the American people.
  We have had the strongest protection system in terms of patents in 
the world; and that is why, in the history of humankind, there has 
never been a more innovative or creative people. It didn't just happen. 
It happened because in our Constitution, our Founding Fathers saw to it 
that the laws protecting one's intellectual creations, both technology 
and written communications, that those creative people would own their 
creations. No, it's not just the diversity of our society that has 
created the wondrous standard of living that we have all bragged about. 
This is not simply the diversity of our people and some notion that we 
have by coming from all over the world that has created the idea that 
all people should have opportunity and provided our people with 
opportunity. No, the innovation and progress and opportunity that we've 
enjoyed in America can be traced to our law, the law that protected the 
property rights of our people, just as we protected the political, just 
as we've protected the personal rights of our citizens.
  Eli Whitney invented the cotton gin. But he also invented 
interchangeable parts for manufacturing. How did that change America? 
How did that change the world? It uplifted us so people could have 
different sets of clothing that they could wear. The common person was 
helped by the fact of America's creative genius. Eli Whitney was a 
product of the American Constitution.
  Cyrus McCormick invented the reaper. Before that people had to carry 
heavy pieces of equipment, scythes and reapers that were based on human 
strength and not strength of technology. With the invention of the 
reaper, people had more food, people had full stomachs.
  Samuel Morse invented the telegraph, and from it came, of course, the 
telephone. And then there was Thomas Edison who invented the light bulb 
and so many of the other inventions. These were not just accidents. 
These were created because these people were able to flourish because 
they had constitutional protections for their rights of their 
invention.
  One segment of our population, black Americans, were prolific 
inventors. Even at times when their rights were not being recognized, 
even when they faced major discrimination in our country, and at that 
time, even then, the issue of patent protection for our black citizens 
was recognized and because of that, many black Americans excelled in 
the area of inventions, men like Jan Matzeliger, who invented a machine 
that was used in shoe manufacturing. And before Matzeliger, and he was 
a former black slave, before he invented this shoe manufacturing 
machine, people in this country and all over the world usually wore one 
or two pairs of shoes for their entire life. And it was he that brought 
down dramatically, brought down the cost of shoes for the entire 
population. One of our product American black inventors.
  George Washington Carver, a world respected scientist and inventor, 
and so many more in the black community. Why? Because in that era, when 
blacks were discriminated against, as I say, we actually respected the 
rights of ownership of black inventors and thus they excelled when 
their rights were protected.
  We are proud of our history of technology, because we know, as 
Americans, we have, as we have always known throughout our country's 
history, that these inventions that we're talking about, made by 
Americans of every background, helped elevate the standard of living of 
all Americans. It created more wealth, wealth that was created with 
less labor and less burden on our people. It increased the standard of 
living of working people in this country so that not only the elite 
prospered, but all of the people had a full belly and clothes for their 
children.
  The opportunity of all people who are part of the American 
brotherhood and sisterhood, the well-being of those people can be 
traced, not just to our diversity, which is something we celebrate, but 
also to the constitutional protection of our rights. And one of those 
rights which is so often overlooked is the right of people, the 
creators of new ideas, to own those ideas, whether we're talking about 
the written word or whether we're talking about technological advances.
  And then of course, when we're talking about this, how can anyone 
forget the Wright brothers. The Wright brothers. We remember the Wright 
brothers. They were two guys who worked in a bicycle shop. They ended 
up inventing something just less than 100 years ago, or just about 100 
years ago actually, just a few more years than 100 years ago, and they 
were told, 110 years ago that it was impossible for them to make this 
invention. Yet, they went ahead. The elites were telling them it was 
impossible. They went ahead and they spent their own money, their own 
time. They saved up. They had very little capital. They were the 
ultimate little guys, and they moved ahead and

[[Page 23475]]

they did finally receive a patent because they changed the future of 
humankind, because they were the ones, of course, who took us from our 
feet planted on the ground to taking us off the ground and putting us 
on the road to the heavens. Just two ordinary Americans.
  We Americans are proud that with our opportunity all people have a 
chance and all people can help pull the rest of us up into the heavens 
like the Wright brothers.
  It was not only the raw muscle of every American. And so often people 
mistakenly think that human progress is a result of whether people work 
hard or not. That is not why people have higher standards of living. 
There are many people all over the world who work hard. They work 
strenuously hard. They work 15 hours a day. Their jobs are grueling. 
But no matter how hard they work, their society doesn't progress. Their 
families don't live any better.
  No, hard work is not the only thing. Yes, hard work is part of it, 
but ingenuity and creativity, the intellectual part of the equation is 
vitally important to the success of any nation. And, yes, the legal 
system is also a vital part of that formula that will lead to uplifting 
all of humankind and can be seen in the example of the United States. 
So, yes, Americans work hard, just as others have. But Americans had 
their rights protected under law. And that's what permitted the 
innovators and the creators and the technologists to thrive in this 
country and what pulled the standard of living of all of our people up. 
What was established was a system in our Constitution and with our laws 
and our patent system that would protect ingenuity and creativity.
  We treated intellectual property, the creation of new technologies, 
as we treated property, as we treated personal, and as we've treated 
political, rights. And that is what America is all about.
  Every person has rights. Now, we didn't always live up to that dream; 
and, yes, there was discrimination, terrible discrimination against 
black citizens and we always have to recognize that. And against Indian 
Americans and others. But we have tried our best, and we are moving 
forward trying to perfect our system.
  But every American, every American has benefited by the fact that our 
technologies have been protected under constitutional law; and thus our 
creators, our creative population has managed to bring about a higher 
standard of living and opportunities for all Americans.
  Today we face a great historical challenge. And this challenge comes 
at exactly a time when our country is threatened from abroad 
economically, as never before. We must prevail over our economic 
competitors and adversaries, or the American people will suffer.
  There are people who think of themselves at war with us. We know that 
radical Islam thinks they're at war with us. But we also have people 
who think they're at war with us economically. They're at war with the 
well-being of the American people. They see us and the well-being of 
our people as their target. We must win this war, this economic 
competition that we are entering, this economic competition based not 
on hard work but on technology and creative genius; and if we do not 
win this war, our people will lose. Our people will lose especially if 
we permit the technology and creative genius of our people to be stolen 
by people who are our economic adversaries and to be used to outcompete 
our own people. If we lose this battle, our people will suffer. Future 
generations will see their standard of living decline, as well as the 
safety and strength of our country. If we do not remain technologically 
superior, we will find that in the future the livelihood of our people 
and the safety of our country will be in jeopardy.
  Our economic adversaries, and their allies within the American 
business community, and let us note that, that our economic adversaries 
have allies in multinational corporations, many of them who are, what, 
part of the American business community. But these economic adversaries 
are engaged in a systematic attack on our well-being, and thus they 
have noticed one of the strongest and most important elements of 
America's success has been the patent protection that we have offered 
the American people.
  Today, multinational corporations, some based here in the United 
States, run by an elite whose allegiance is to no country, these people 
have tremendous influence near the Nation's Capitol. You can see it 
when it comes to China policy. You can see it when it comes to trade 
policy. And, now, in their attempt to undermine patent protections, you 
can see that in this effort to undermine the constitutional patent 
protections that our people have enjoyed for over 200 years.
  There is a corporate elite at play who don't give it a second thought 
to move their manufacturing operations to China. Now, here you've got 
Americans supposedly, American businessmen. They're moving their 
manufacturing to a country run by a Marxist dictatorship. This 
corporate elite betrays American values and betrays the American 
working people themselves. What? Why do they do this?
  Well, they would rather exploit Chinese slave labor with the full 
cooperation of a dictatorial Chinese regime, than they would pay the 
market rate for the American working person and as well, which is part 
of the price, of course, of having a free society in which they are 
protected here at home. Yet, they would go to China and make a deal 
with the world's worst human rights abuser to set up a manufacturing 
unit there. And this very same elite will do that and betray the 
American worker in order to make a 25 percent profit rather than a 10 
percent or a 5 percent profit at home, while at the same time the 
American working people will get their share of the benefit because 
they're working in that company. No, the American corporate elite that 
goes to China would rather do that. Many of them, by the way, are part 
of the electronics industry, as we know. The electronics industry has 
moved in a big way to China. They've even, in fact, claimed that, oh, 
well if we just have more interaction economically with China, that, 
what will happen? Well, China will evolve into a democratic society.
  Yet, these same corporate leaders, supposedly Americans, help the 
Chinese Government set up a computer system that will aid them in 
tracking down democratic opponents of the dictatorship. We know now 
that the Falun Gong in China is suffering immense repression, as are 
other believers in God. Yet, we have a business elite that doesn't 
blink an eye at that and goes there and invests their technology and 
their capital in creating manufacturing there.

                              {time}  2315

  Well, people who will do that won't think twice about stealing a 
small inventor's or a little guy's invention so that they won't have to 
pay royalties to that American inventor. Why should they? If they are 
willing to deal with the tyrants and the gangsters in China and betray 
the American workers, why would they care about giving royalties to 
some inventor? And what are they doing? They are helping steal the 
American inventors' products without giving the royalties, and, worse, 
they are taking it to China to use in manufacturing facilities over 
there that will even put more Americans out of work here.
  How could any American do that? Well, they aren't Americans. What 
they are, if you get right down to it, they are globalists. Yes, people 
have to understand that here we are, our country has evolved into now 
this new dichotomy of globalists versus patriots.
  Well, put me on the side of the patriots. We are supposed to be 
watching out for the interests of the American people. We are not 
supposed to be watching out for the American business elite any more 
than we are supposed to be watching out for the American worker. They 
are supposed to have equal rights. And one of those rights has been the 
protection of intellectual property. But the business and corporate 
elites that want to move to

[[Page 23476]]

China, the same ones who are behind this legislation, H.R. 1908, the 
electronics industry, want to steal the technology being developed by 
the little guy in America so they won't have to pay royalties. That is 
what it comes down to. And these same people who are building the 
factories in China, the same people who are giving technology to China, 
the same people now who want to take the ideas of American inventors 
and take them to China and elsewhere without having to pay royalties, 
these are the people behind 1908.
  The justification for this attack on the patent system, guess what, 
it is called harmonization of our laws with the rest of the world. If 
you ask those people why do we have to make these fundamental changes 
to our patent law? Our patent law has been there for 200 years. They 
will tell you that we have to harmonize our law with the rest of the 
world and our laws are totally different.
  We cannot permit corporate elitists who consider themselves 
globalists to mold our policies, especially if it means diminishing the 
legal protections for our American citizens, especially those inventors 
and creative people who are coming up with the technologies that 
Americans are going to need to have if our country is to be prosperous 
and secure in the future.
  If the globalists are successful, 20 years from now our citizens will 
wonder what hit them. Pearl Harbor happened in a moment. Our people 
woke up to the threat and they mobilized. Today it is happening slowly, 
and the attack is less evident. But rights are being eroded by the 
changes in our law that will cause a decreasing standard of living to 
our people and damage our way of life, and that damage will be 
devastating to the American people in years ahead, and they will never 
know what hit them. This attack is being conducted not by bombers in 
Pearl Harbor and Hawaii, but it is being done by lobbyists in the 
Nation's capital who are out to pillage our wealth and transfer that 
wealth and power overseas. You see it everywhere.
  Who is watching out for the interests of the American people? We will 
let the public determine that. But first we have to get the public's 
attention. And these moves on this patent bill have been so quiet. The 
vote is going to be Friday, H.R. 1908. They are going to try to slip 
this by. One of the steps necessary for them to transfer the wealth and 
to cut down this dominance that the American people have over the 
global economy, one of the things they have to do to achieve that goal 
so we are harmonized with the rest of the world is to destroy our 
patent system and make it like the patent system from other countries.
  Lobbyists have been hired by well-heeled multinational corporations 
and by companies who no longer have any desire to pay for the use of 
technology that has been developed by other American citizens, little 
guys. They, of course, are not saying we are out to destroy the patent 
system. They will be aghast when they hear that I am suggesting they 
want to destroy the patent system. They know that is what it is, but 
they will act like they are aghast.
  Now, there are lots of flaws in our patent system. We hear about a 
widespread problem, and there are some problems. But we know that many 
of the problems are just being exaggerated. For example, we hear horror 
stories concerning companies that are tied up for years in court and 
eventually have to relent to trial lawyers in terms about delays in the 
system. We hear about that. We hear about examiners who are overworked, 
which is true. Our patent examiners are heavily overworked. They aren't 
getting the training they need, and they are not getting the pay they 
deserve. So we have got some problems in our patent system that we need 
to take care of. But that has nothing to do with H.R. 1908.
  In reality, of course, some of these problems aren't real. Patent 
lawsuits are not a major problem, as people are claiming they are. 
Between 1993 and 2005, the number of patent lawsuits versus the number 
of patents granted has been steady at around 1.5 percent. In fact, in 
2006 only 102 patent cases actually went to trial. So when they say we 
have got to do this to correct the lawsuit problem, there isn't a major 
lawsuit problem.
  But there are real problems that need to be solved. Our patent 
examiners, as I said, are overworked and they are underpaid. They need 
to be trained. More money that comes from people buying patents, we 
need to keep that right at the patent office and train those patent 
examiners and give them the money they need so we can hire the top 
quality people.
  Unfortunately, the legislation making its way through the system does 
not correct the problems. The problems are being used as an excuse, but 
the proposed changes that we are talking about here are not dealing 
with the problems. So there must be some other goal of this 
legislation.
  So let's understand we need patent legislation that speeds up the 
patent process, provides training and compensation for the patent 
examiners, and helps us protect our inventors against theft. Yes, we 
need to help our inventors protect themselves against foreign threat 
and, yes, even domestic threat. And we need to put some work into 
patent reform which will protect our inventors. Well, the bill that we 
are talking about has nothing to do with that. A bill that handled 
those goals would be justified and welcomed.
  Unfortunately, what we are witnessing is a replay of the illegal 
immigration strategy. The American people are crying out for protection 
against a virtual invasion of illegal immigrants into our country. The 
special interests who benefited by this flood of illegals tried to push 
an immigration bill through the Congress that would have made the 
situation worse. That's right. They had a bill in the name of illegal 
immigration reform that would have made it worse. To confuse the 
public, they kept calling it a ``comprehensive'' bill as if it was 
designed to fix the problem. Instead, it was designed for one thing and 
one thing only. The comprehensive bill for illegal immigration was 
designed to give amnesty to all those illegals who came here illegally, 
which would have attracted, had we given them that amnesty, tens of 
millions of more illegals into our country. So it would have made it 
worse. But with a straight face, those who were advocating illegal 
immigration reform kept calling it a ``comprehensive'' plan even though 
they knew that implied they were reforming the system to make it better 
when, in fact, they were going the opposite direction of what the vast 
majority of people knew was the problem. And the problem was what? A 
huge influx of illegal immigrants into our country, and giving amnesty 
would have made it worse.
  Well, the same strategy is seemingly being used by those who are 
behind the effort to destroy the American patent system. So you will 
never hear them say they want to destroy the American patent system the 
same way that the advocates of comprehensive immigration would never 
admit what they were doing was amnesty. No, they are out to destroy the 
patent system as it has worked since the founding of our country. 
Instead of arguing their case, they are simply calling it a 
``comprehensive'' bill. Does that sound familiar? A ``comprehensive 
patent bill,'' that makes it sound like you are going to make it 
better. No, you are out to destroy the patent system. A ``comprehensive 
immigration bill,'' that sounds like you want to end this immigration 
influx into our country. No, it is going to make it worse. Well, that 
is why the American people are a little bit confused.
  Who is watching out for the American people? The American people have 
got to pay attention to this.
  This bill, H.R. 1809, is similar to the one that we barely beat back 
10 years ago. I called that the ``Steal American Technologies Act,'' 
and that was back 10 years ago. And, believe me, we were up against the 
most powerful corporations. We were just a ragtag group of people. 
Marcy Kaptur on that side of the aisle and Steny Hoyer helped us out as 
well, Don Manzullo and myself and just a couple others. We fought these 
special interests, and no one thought we had a chance. But we won. And 
we won because the American people got wind of what was happening,

[[Page 23477]]

and we won. We beat it back, and that was in 1997. But here we go again 
with a bill that looks almost exactly like that bill in so many ways. 
So I will just call H.R. 1809 the ``Steal American Technologies Act, 
Part Two.''
  First and foremost, we have to, of course, look at what does H.R. 
1908 do? First and foremost, it is designed to weaken the patent 
protection of the American inventor. So let's just note that right off. 
The purpose of the bill is to weaken the patent protection, the 
constitutional rights that the American inventor has had since the 
founding of our country.
  I support real reform, as do the others who oppose this bill, but the 
proposed changes in H.R. 1908 will cause the collapse of the American 
patent system, the system that has sustained America for 200 years, and 
that is the real purpose behind this bill. Make no mistake about it.
  For the Record I would submit a list of those major people and 
organizations who are opposed to the bill, Mr. Speaker.
  At this point in my remarks, I submit that list for the Record.

     Organizations and Companies With Objections to Berman Patent 
                        Legislation (H.R. 1908)

       3M, Abbott Accelerated Technologies, Inc., Acorn 
     Cardiovascular Inc., Adams Capital Management, Adroit Medical 
     Systems, Inc., AdvaMed, Advanced Diamond Technologies, Inc., 
     Advanced Medical Optics, Inc., Advanced Neuromodulation 
     Systems, Inc., Aero-Marine Company, AFL-CIO, African American 
     Republican Leadership Council, AIPLA--American Intellectual 
     Property Law Association.
        Air Liquide, Air Products, ALD NanoSolutions, Inc., ALIO 
     Industries, Allergan, Inc., Almyra, Inc., AmberWave Systems 
     Corporation, American Conservative Union (The), American 
     Intellectual property Law, Association (AIPLA), American Seed 
     Trade, Americans for Sovereignty.
        Americans for the Preservation of Liberty, Amylin 
     Pharmaceuticals, AngioDynamics, Inc., Applied Medical, 
     Applied Nanotech, Inc., Argentis Pharmaceuticals, LLC, 
     Arizona Biolndustry Association, ARYx Therapeutics, Ascenta 
     Therapeutics, Inc., Association of University Technology 
     Managers (AUTM).
        Asthmatx, Inc., AstraZeneca, Aware, Inc., Baxa 
     Corporation, Baxter Healthcare Corporation, BayBio, Beckman 
     Coulter, BIO--Biotechnology Industry Organization, BioCardia, 
     Inc., BIOCOM, Biogen Idec, Biomedical Association, BioOhio, 
     Bioscience Institute, Biotechnology Council of New Jersey.
        Blacks for Economic Security Trust Fund, BlazeTech 
     Corporation, Boston Scientific Corporation, Bridgestone 
     Americas Holding, Inc., Bristol-Myers Squibb, BuzzLogic, 
     California Healthcare Institute, California Healthcare 
     Institute (The), Canopy Ventures, Carbide Derivative 
     Technologies, Cardiac Concepts, Inc., CardioDynamics, 
     Cargill, Inc., Cassie-Shipherd Group (The), Caterpillar, 
     Celgene Corporation, Cell Genesys, Inc., Center 7, Inc., 
     Center for Small Business and the Environment (The), Centre 
     for Security Policy, Cephalon, CheckFree, Christian Coalition 
     of America.
       Cincinnati Sub-Zero Products, Coalition for 21st Century 
     Patent Reform (The), Coalitions for America, CogniTek 
     Management Systems, Inc., Colorado Bioscience Association, 
     Conceptus, Inc., CONNECT, Connecticut United for Research 
     Excellence, Cornell University, Corning Incorporated, Coronis 
     Medical Ventures, Council for America, CropLife America, 
     Cryptography Research, Cummins-Allison Corporation.
       Cummins Inc., CVRx Inc., Dais Analytic Corporation, 
     Dartmouth Regional Technology Center, Inc., Declaration 
     Alliance, Deltanoid Pharmaceuticals, Digimarc Corporation, 
     DirectPointe, Dow Chemical Company, Dupont, Dura-Line 
     Corporation, Dynatronics Co., Eagle Forum, Eastman Chemical 
     Company, Economic Development Center, Edwards Lifesciences, 
     Elan Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Electronics for Imaging, Eli 
     Lilly and Company, Ellman Innovations LLC, Enterprise 
     Partners Venture Capital, Evalve, Inc.
       Exxon Mobile Corporation, Fallbrook Technologies Inc., 
     FarSounder, Inc. Footnote.com.
       Gambro BCT, General Electric, Genomic Health, Inc., Gen-
     Probe Incorporated, Genzyme, Georgia Biomedical Partnership, 
     Glacier Cross, Inc., GlaxoSmithKline, Glenview State Bank, 
     Hawaii Science & Technology Council, HealthCare Institute of 
     New Jersey, HeartWare, Inc., Helius, Inc., Henkel 
     Corporation, Hoffman-LaRoche, Inc.
       iBIO, Imago Scientific Instruments, Impulse Dynamics (USA), 
     Inc., Indiana Health Industry Forum, Indiana University, 
     Innovation Alliance, Institute of Electrical and Electronics 
     Engineers (IEEE)-USA, InterDigital Communications 
     Corporation, Intermolecular, Inc., International Association 
     of Professional and Technical Engineers (IFPTE), Invitrogen 
     Corporation, Iowa Biotechnology Association, ISTA 
     Pharmaceuticals, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Johnson & 
     Johnson, Leadership Institute (The), Let Freedom Ring, Life 
     Science Alley, LITMUS, LLC.
       LSI Corporation, Lux Capital Management, Luxul Corporation, 
     Maryland Taxpayers' Association.
       Masimo Corporation, Massachusetts Biotechnology Council, 
     MassMEDIC, Maxygen Inc., MDMA--Medical Device Manufacturer's 
     Association, Medical College of Wisconsin, MedImmune, Inc., 
     Medtronic, Merck, Metabasis Therapeutics, Inc., Metabolex, 
     Inc., Metabolix, Inc., Metacure (USA), Inc., MGI Pharma Inc., 
     MichBio, Michigan Small Tech Association, Michigan State 
     University, Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Milliken & 
     Company, Mohr, Davidow Ventures, Monsanto Company, Motorola.
       NAM--National Association of Manufacturers, 
     NanoBioMagnetics, Inc. (NBMI), NanoBusiness Alliance (The), 
     NanoInk, Inc., NanoIntegris, Inc., Nanomix, Inc., Nanophase 
     Technologies, NanoProducts Corporation, Nanosys, Inc., 
     Nantero, Inc., National Center for Public Policy Research, 
     Nektar Therapeutics, Neoconix, Inc., Neuro Resource Group 
     (NRG), Neuronetics, Inc., NeuroPace, New England Innovation 
     Alliance, New Hampshire Biotechnology Council, New Hampshire 
     Department of Economic Development, New Mexico Biotechnical 
     and Biomedical Association, New York Biotechnology 
     Association.
       Norseman Group (The), North Carolina Biosciences 
     Organization, North Carolina State University, North Dakota 
     State University, Northrop Grumman Corporation, Northwestern 
     University, Novartis Corporation, Novasys Medical Inc., 
     NovoNordisk, NUCRYST Pharmaceuticals, Inc. NuVasive, Inc., 
     Nuvelo, Inc., Ohio State University, OpenCEL, LLC,
       Palmetto Biotechnology Alliance, Patent Cafe.com, Inc., 
     Patent Office Professional Association, Pennsylvania Bio, 
     Pennsylvania State University, PepsiCo, Inc., Pfizer, PhRMA--
     Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, 
     Physical Sciences Inc., PointeCast Corporation, Power 
     Innovations International, PowerMetal Technologies, Inc., 
     Preformed Line Products, Procter & Gamble, Professional 
     Inventors' Alliance, ProRhythm, Inc., Purdue University, Pure 
     Plushy Inc., QUALCOMM Inc.
       QuantumSphere, Inc., QuesTek Innovations LLC, Radiant 
     Medical, Inc., Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Research 
     Triangle Park, NC, Retractable Technologies, Inc., 
     RightMarch.com, S & C Electric Company, Salix 
     Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Sangamo Biosciences, Inc., ScanDisk 
     Corporation, Semprius, Inc., Small Business Association of 
     Michigan--Economic Development Center, Small Business 
     Exporters, Association of the United States (The).
       Small Business Technology Council (The), Smart Bomb 
     Interactive, Smile Reminder, SmoothShapes, Inc., Solera 
     Networks, South Dakota Biotech Association, Southern 
     California Biomedical Council, Spiration, Inc., St. Louis 
     University, Standup Bed Company (The), State of New Hampshire 
     Department of Resources and Economic Development, Stella 
     Group, Ltd. (The), StemCells, SurgiQuest, Inc.
       Symyx Technologies, Inc., Tech Council of Maryland/MdBio, 
     Technology Patents & Licensing, Tennessee Biotechnology 
     Association, Tessera, Inc., Texas A&M, Texas Healthcare, 
     Texas Instruments, Three Arch Partners.
       United Technologies, University of California System, 
     University of Illinois, University of Iowa, University of 
     Maryland, University of Michigan, University of Minnesota, 
     University of New Hampshire, University of North Carolina 
     System, University of Rochester, University of Utah, 
     University of Wisconsin-Madison, US Business and Industry 
     Council, US Council for International Business.
       USGI Medical, USW--United Steelworkers, Vanderbilt 
     University and Medical Center, Virent Energy Systems, Inc., 
     Virginia Biotechnology Association, Visidyne, Inc., 
     VisionCare Opthamalogic Technologies, Inc., Washington 
     Biotechnology & Biomedical Association, Washington 
     University, WaveRx, Inc.
       Wayne State University, Wescor, Inc., Weyerhaeuser, Wilson 
     Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, Wisconsin Alumni Research 
     Foundation (WARF), Wisconsin Biotechnology and Medical Device 
     Association, Wyeth.

   That list includes some large companies. It includes biotech 
companies, for example, who are putting out so much of the technology 
that we will need for the future. It includes pharmaceuticals who know 
that there are companies around the world who are waiting to steal the 
product after they have spent hundreds of millions of American dollars 
into developing new pharmaceuticals. Almost all of our major 
universities are against this patent bill because they themselves are 
developing new technologies and they know that the new patent bill will 
undermine, undermine, their efforts to create these new technologies 
and to benefit from

[[Page 23478]]

the technologies, as they should because they are the creators. The 
patent examiners are against this legislation. Labor unions are against 
this. The AFL-CIO is against this legislation. That is why we have 
another bipartisan coalition with Ms. Kaptur and Judge Hastings and 
others who are on our side in this battle. It is a bipartisan 
Republican-Democrat coalition. It is the patriots versus the 
globalists.

                              {time}  2330

  So why are so many opposed to it? Perhaps it's easiest to understand 
the issue, because if you talk about what this bill does in terms of 
disclosure, and what does that mean, in this bill it's called 
publication.
  From the founding of our country until recent years, it has been 
mandated that every patent application be held confidential until the 
patent was issued. So if you're an inventor and you've got an idea and 
you've developed it, you filed the application; but you know that 
that's going to be held secret. In fact, patent examiners could be put 
in jail for felonies if they release that information.
  Well, this, of course, is dramatically different than the rest of the 
world. In the rest of the world, after 18 months, in Japan and Europe, 
if you file for a patent, even if you don't get the patent, they're 
going to publish it for everybody to see. And the inventor is so 
vulnerable, they have to give up usually almost all the rights to the 
things they've invented. That's why you don't see the Japanese 
inventing many things; they perfect things, but they don't invent them.
  In short, this bill, H.R. 1908, the Steal American Technologies Act, 
the sequel, now get into this, this is really important and it's easy 
to understand. This bill would eliminate the right of confidentiality 
to American inventors. What does that mean? H.R. 1908 would mandate the 
publication of all patent applications 18 months after the patent is 
applied for whether or not the patent has been granted.
  Does everybody understand what we're talking about here? We're 
talking about American inventors up until now have known, if they so 
chose to do this, they would not have to reveal their secrets until the 
patent was given to them. Thus they had some legal protection. This 
bill will take that right away from the American inventors so that if 
they apply for a patent on very sophisticated technological 
breakthroughs, the Chinese, the Indians, the Japanese, the Koreans, 
they will have all have the information and be in manufacturing before 
our small inventors even get their patent.
  With the Steal American Technologies Act, does that sound like that's 
what I'm describing? That's exactly what we're describing. We are 
inviting the foreign thieves to come in and take our most precious 
technological advances and use those technologies against us to put our 
people out of work. That's why the labor unions are against this bill. 
That's why the Democratic Party should be against this bill and the 
Republican Party should be against it. That's why patriots should be 
against it. It is easy for everyone to understand that.
  Those pushing H.R. 1908 want China, Japan, Korea, India and others to 
have every detail of developing technologies and of our creative ideas 
even before the patents have been issued. This legislation will 
facilitate China, India, and other countries in their efforts to steal 
our creative genius. First they will say, oh, well the inventor then 
could come back and sue these companies overseas who are using their 
creation that they've gotten by taking it from the information that was 
published. Oh, give me a break. Does anyone really believe that an 
American inventor can go to China or India and can sue after they've 
been in production for years? They can't even get the information of 
how much has been produced over there at that time. So, yes, this is 
the Steal American Technologies Act, and we have got to stop them.
  Secondly, this bill changes the fundamental concept of the American 
patent system, another fundamental concept which this will end up with 
very dramatic and confusing consequences, although it is a little hard 
to understand. Traditionally, ownership rights go to those inventors 
who were the first ones to invent the technology in question. That does 
not necessarily mean that they were the first one to actually file some 
type of patent application that dealt with that particular issue or 
that particular type of technology. No. If someone actually had an 
invention of a machine, their patent, if they actually invented it and 
they could prove that, it wasn't the first to file that counts, it was 
the person who actually invented something. That was a principle in our 
system. And basically what it did is it prevented businesses and 
individuals from having to, for every time they made a little bit of 
progress, to go out and try to apply for another patent.
  Because with this system, what this bill will do, it will make sure 
that businesses now will be flooding the Patent Office every time they 
make one little step forward towards an eventual goal, rather than 
waiting for the goal to be achieved and have a complete new system that 
can be justified to have a patent.
  So the people of the Patent Office believe that this change, which 
seems innocuous, from something that has worked well for the United 
States for 200 years, has worked well for us, and now they want to 
change it so that we can be like the rest of the world supposedly, 
while the rest of the world, the only people who can operate at this 
level are these big multinational corporations, the very elite rich 
guys. No. We want our regular Americans to be able to operate under 
this system. And making it first-to-file makes it so much more 
expensive because you have to apply for so many more patents, the 
little guy gets frozen out. Of course those people that are pushing 
this harmonization know that very well. They just don't care about the 
little guy because they are Goliath, and the little guy is just a 
little David down there.
  I am very happy that the history of the United States Government is 
the history of us being for the little guy over the big guy, that we 
protect the rights of the little guy. That's why our patent law is 
different than the patent law in Japan, where economic shoguns control 
their economy.
  The third, H.R. 1908 fundamentally changes the legal criteria in 
which patents can be challenged. It provides numerous ways in which 
large companies, foreigners, and other infringers can attack and add 
costs to the inventors. So we've added all sorts of new ways for those 
guys to come in and attack that small inventor. We have opened up the 
system to the point where the inventor can be attacked before the 
patent has been granted, and also, the inventor can then, also with 
this legislation, be attacked after the patent has been granted. And 
this again changes those rules by offering new avenues to attack the 
small guy. Of course the big guys don't care; they've got lots of 
lawyers working for them. What this will mean is the big guys can beat 
down the little guys just like they do in Japan. Don't we want to 
harmonize with Japan? Don't we want to have a society like Japan where 
ordinary citizens never dream about increasing their standard of living 
and rising up and having their children live better? No.
  This bill is a catastrophe for the little inventor, and that's why we 
have so many people who have opposed this bill, but yet it keeps moving 
forward. It keeps moving forward because there are special interests 
who will make huge sums of money by not having to may royalties, 
especially in the electronics industry, which is different. Remember, 
they are different, the electronics industry than pharmaceuticals and 
biotech and the universities and the others and the smaller inventor. 
Why are they different? Because what they do is they put together a 
product with many different components, all of which you have to pay a 
royalty in order to use them. They don't want to pay those royalties. 
They want to steal it from the little guy. Well, I'm sorry, the 
electronics industry has to pay for what they use. They're not going to 
set up a system that undermines the protection that the little guys, 
that we've had for 200 years in this country.
  This bill complicates efforts to establish willfulness on the part of 
an infringer. So what happens is you have

[[Page 23479]]

undermined some of the legal criteria used in the case if a small 
inventor or someone does go after an infringer. This bill changes some 
of the actual criteria that are being used. It creates a re-examined 
practice for facilitating attacks by infringers on legitimate patent 
holders. In short, this bill allows large companies to swallow costs 
and risks so that it can beat down the rightful owners of technology.
  Now, it seems like a horror story to America's inventors, but we are 
told what is really going on here, of course, as I keep saying, it's an 
effort to harmonize our laws. Now, doesn't that sound nice? And doesn't 
comprehensive reform sound nice? Just like comprehensive reform sounded 
good for the immigration bill. We knew what that was now, don't we? 
Comprehensive reform was a way to give amnesty and destroy our 
protections against illegal immigration without having to ever confront 
the argument.
  This comprehensive reform of the patent system is the same strategy. 
Yes, they are going to harmonize the law with the rest of the world. 
That's harmony. That sounds like a wonderful word. And 
``comprehensive,'' that also sounds great.
  Well, we have had the strongest patent protection of any country on 
this planet, just as we had the same and the strongest protection for 
the rights of freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and other rights 
that we hold sacred. What would happen if in order to harmonize the 
freedom of religion and freedom of speech for the rest of the world, we 
were told that the protection of our freedoms that we now enjoy need to 
be diminished so that they could be harmonized with the rest of the 
world?
  Let's say we could be like the people of Singapore or some other 
country that is not necessarily democratic, but is not a dictatorship 
either. What would happen if the American people were told that? What 
would happen, I would tell you, there would be a revolution through the 
United States of America. You are not going to diminish the rights of 
the American people in order to harmonize the law internationally. 
Forget it. I don't care if it's personal rights, political rights, 
property rights or technology and creative rights like we're talking 
about tonight. The patriots in this country are not going to see their 
rights diminished in order to create a new world order where we can all 
live in harmony with the elite telling us what to do.
  However, the move to harmonize patent law, of course, is going 
smoothly right now, unlike it would if we tried to say we're going to 
bring down and diminish all those other rights, because there would be 
a revolution right now. But with patent law it's going a lot more 
smoothly.
  In fact, it's coming up to a vote Friday and most people have no idea 
it's coming to the floor, or most Americans and most people even in 
this body have no idea of the significance of H.R. 1908. Why? Because 
it's being kept very low key. There's no fanfare. Not many people can 
even understand it. As I say, they tune out as soon as they hear the 
word ``patent law.'' All of this, of course, while the freedom and 
well-being of future generations is being frittered away.
  We are on the edge. If this bill passes, it will have dramatic impact 
on the well-being of average Americans. The fact is we have had the 
strongest patent rights protection, and that is why we have had more 
innovation and a higher standard of living than any other people in the 
world. The common man here has the opportunity that common people in 
other parts of the world do not have because America has had 
technological superiority, and we've had a system based on protecting 
individual rights, the individual rights of the little guy, not just 
the big guys.
  If our rights to patent protection are diminished, which is what H.R. 
1908 will do, if we do that, if we diminish the rights of our patent 
protection in order to harmonize with the rest of the world, we will 
end up with the same type of opportunity and the same type of rights 
that they have in Third World countries.
  Is that what we want? Do we want our people to have harmonized 
rights, new world order so we can all live like they live in Third 
World countries? Perhaps if someone is a corporate elitist who lives in 
a gated community, that might sound good. Hey, we can have all kinds of 
peons just walking around who will do my bidding and I can send my kids 
to private school. We live behind a gated community, I can actually 
have a driver and my kids can have nannies and we could have people 
cleaning up the yard and I can have my manufacturing facility in China, 
where they don't care if they're polluting the air or not. Boy, I'll 
tell you, that doesn't hurt those guys because they don't identify, 
when you say Third World country, they don't say, gee, I would be 
living worse off, they think it's the other guy, the little guy. And 
they're right, it's the little guys. Yeah. These people don't even want 
to pay royalties.
  The electronics industry, what this is based on, does not want to pay 
royalties to the little guys. If you want to see anything more about 
this, you want to know the historic background of it, go down to the 
Nation's Capitol and you will find a statue to Philo Farnsworth. Philo 
Farnsworth was the guy who invented the picture tube. RCA, Mr. Sarnoff, 
the president of RCA, tried to steal that technology from Mr. 
Farnsworth because he was just a little guy. And for 20 years they 
fought it out, the biggest, most powerful corporation. Instead of just 
paying Mr. Farnsworth a royalty and giving him some credit, they had to 
steal it from him, to beat him down in the ground and smash him like a 
bug. But luckily we live in the United States of America. That case 
went all the way to the Supreme Court; and God bless America, the 
Supreme Court sided with Farnsworth instead of this RCA that tried to 
dominate this man who gave them the genius that they needed to make the 
picture tube work. We wouldn't have had it. They were going in the 
exactly the wrong direction, but they couldn't even give him the 
credit.
  That's what the corporate elite thinks about us little guys. That's 
the way they do it. That's why they want to change constitutional 
protections, make it a new world order. That's why we have all of this 
talk about globalism and all these international bodies that we're 
going to give power to because our corporate elite doesn't feel 
threatened by that, but each and every American should because none of 
those people overseas are going to watch out for us.
  H.R. 1908 is coming up on Friday. It's a major attack on a 
constitutional right that's been part of the American system, part of 
the American system since the founding of your country. It's written 
into our Constitution.

                              {time}  2345

  We cannot make those changes and expect things are going to stay the 
same. But we beat this before. Marcy Kaptur, Dana Rohrabacher, Don 
Manzullo and a few others, we beat back this attempt. But we did it 
because the American people called their congressmen and said, ``Don't 
vote for the H.R. 1908 Steal American Technologies Act.'' That is what 
they did before, and we won. We contacted our congressmen.
  That is how we beat comprehensive immigration reform. We can beat 
this bill, too, just like that. We can watch out for America if the 
PATRIOT Act and we watch out for the little guy together, if all of us 
come together and watch out for the little guy, all of our rights will 
be protected. That is what America is all about.
  I beg my fellow Members to pay attention to this vote. I beg the 
American people to pay attention to this vote. There will be dramatic 
changes in our life and the opportunity our children will face and the 
safety of our country if we change this fundamental of our law.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

                          ____________________