Let me be very clear. They do not embrace the Rohrabacher substitute; they do not embrace the bill introduced by the gentleman from North Carolina. It seems they do not want a change. And I cannot blame them for that attitude. If we are going to change such a successful system, does it not cause us concern that the research universities are not here asking us to do it? Oh, the commercializers are. And I do not put any negative spin on that phrase, a commercializer is important, as well as an inventor, but they are different, and the motive of the commercializer is to get available as quickly as possible the information and to use it for commercial purpose as quickly as possible. The inventor loses under House Resolution 400 in order to achieve that objective.
Andrea Joy Campbell: “Let me be very clear. They do not embrace the Rohrabacher substitute; they do not embrace the bill introduced by the…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing concerns about changes to the U.S. patent system and its impact on research universities.
Share
More from Andrea Joy Campbell
I also agree that securing our Nation's ports and points of entry is critical to protecting our citizens.
I appreciate both gentlemen's comments and their remarks and their tone and their tenor. I respectfully disagree because I think that, again, not a single uniformed person is being affected. This has nothing to do with that. I think 1…
The expanded use of domestic natural gas is the most obvious and cost-effective way, immediately and over the long term, to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and increase energy security.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. On one other point, there are people who say that a financial collapse didn't happen, and, in fact, it didn't. You don't get credit for bad things that don't happen. I would argue that the financial collapse was…





