seth: Many patent attorneys are equally confused. In a nut, the average joe won't be able to afford to patent their idea and companies like NeoMedia will find it more expensive to maintain their portfolio.
The law changes much of what we knew about IP law. As of today, the US is no longer a first-to-invent nation, we are first-to-file. This changes what consists of what we consider prior art resulting in many start-ups not being able to own what they invent.
The law now say the is still a one-year grace period for disclosures but only by the inventor. This is compounded by the inventors might only be determined years after the patent is filed.
There is now a post-grant review which allows your competitors to try and knock out your patents up to 9 months AFTER it has been issued. This essentially extends the prosecution period of a patent and will further reduce start-up's valuation and exit price. I heard one lawyer call it the never-ending-fee clause. After the 9 month review period, which could last years to finish, anyone can file an opposition to the patent based on "reasonable likelihood" standard and unpatentablility proved "preponderance of the evidence."
3rd parties may now submit prior art during the normal prosecution period (pre-issue).
It is up in the air how much of this work, but the winners are attorneys. The losers are innovators who don't have the capital to address IP issues before they launch their company. Once your product is released, it is likely also in the public domain.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
