USPTO Sued Over "Unqualified Appointment" 125
Techdirt is reporting that a small group of patent lawyers and investors are suing the US Secretary of Commerce in order to prevent the appointment of Margaret Peterlin to Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Deputy Director of the US Patent and Trademark Office. "According to the suit, filed Monday in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, Congress amended the Patent Act in 1999 to require that the Director and Deputy Director of the USPTO each have "professional experience and background in patent or trademark law." Peterlin's appointment, announced May 8, violates the statute because she "lacks the requisite professional experience and background," the suit said. [...] They are asking the court to order Gutierrez to dismiss Peterlin immediately and establish rules to assess what qualifies as a professional background and experience in patent or trademark law. They also want the court to order Gutierrez to appoint a replacement for Peterlin who fulfills those requirements."
no standing (Score:3, Insightful)
Establish rules to assess what qualifies (Score:2, Insightful)
She's hardly the only one... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:no standing (Score:5, Insightful)
And the obvious redress would be to kick the unqualified candidate and replace her with a qualified candidate...One whose credentials include more than being J. Dennis Hastert's Counsel for Legal Policy.
Re:hmm (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:no standing (Score:2, Insightful)
Thomas Jefferson trumps you:
If nature has made any one thing less susceptible than all others of exclusive property, it is the action of the thinking power called an idea, which an individual may exclusively possess as long as he keeps it to himself; but the moment it is divulged, it forces itself into the possession of every one, and the receiver cannot dispossess himself of it. Its peculiar character, too, is that no one possesses the less, because every other possesses the whole of it. He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Source [uchicago.edu]
Re:Huh? (Score:3, Insightful)
Seriously, it would be a hell of a good thing if, in order to serve as a congress-critter or a US senator, you had to pass a detailed test on the content of the constitution. Much of our political system is staffed by people who have no idea what is constitutional and what is not.
Hence our broad complement of unconstitutional federal activities - ex post facto laws, federal restrictions on keeping and bearing arms, taking of property for non-public use, abridgment of speech, commerce clause inversion, non-enumerated power grabs, failure to provide access to representation, failure to provide speedy trial, warrentless searches and seizures, government support of particular religious outlooks, etc.
It'll never happen, though. We even let these buffoons set their own salaries; we've entirely forfeited control of a federal government that was supposed to serve us.
Patriot citizen boxes: ballot, soap, jury, ammo, cell, coffin.
Typical citizen boxes: Television.
Political repr. boxes: Soap, PAC, junket, pocket, rider.
Re:no standing (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Hot Air (Score:2, Insightful)
Why are they suing? Because it's gotten so bad that the only way to get competent people running our governmental is to sue.
Re:no standing (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Huh? (Score:5, Insightful)
More like they simply don't give a shit. And why should they? We're not holding them accountable.
Re:Hot Air (Score:5, Insightful)
She has a generally strong political background but appears to be qualified in no particular whatsoever. That's a far cry from being "totally" qualified.
Totally qualified would mean qualified in all respects, not just maybe a vague hand wave because she knows how to work the political machine.
That appears to be the essential problem. People somehow have developed the hubris that any sufficiently talented generalist can master a new field in short order and lead it to success. Not so. A senior position in any field requires someone who knows the field. And at our present level of complexity, that degree of mastery takes a lifetime.
You can settle for less in the name of political expediency, but don't fool yourself that it's just as good an appointment as someone who actually knew the field well. A totally qualified candidate would know the field and be able to get along with the political establishment. You're getting half a slice of pie.
Re:Hot Air (Score:2, Insightful)