“Stand up for open source software patent defense” was a 2023 Linux Foundation campaign urging people to comment on proposed changes to Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) proceedings. Its public-comment deadline—June 20, 2023, at 11:59 p.m. EDT—has passed. The campaign was a time-limited policy effort, not a product or a standing public service.
What the campaign was about
On June 1, 2023, The Linux Foundation called on open source stakeholders to oppose a U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) advance notice of proposed rulemaking, or ANPRM. The notice asked for public input on possible changes to proceedings under the America Invents Act (AIA) before the PTAB. Those proceedings can give parties a way to challenge the validity of an issued patent.
The campaign described its aim as protecting open source software from patent attacks and asked readers to submit a written comment. The USPTO notice was a request for input, not a final rule. The campaign’s predictions about the effects of the proposals should be understood as advocacy positions, not as established findings or proof that those changes took effect.
What the USPTO was considering
The ANPRM sought input about potential changes affecting inter partes review (IPR) and post-grant review (PGR). The subjects included how the Director and PTAB might use discretion when deciding whether to institute a proceeding, as well as several procedural details.
#1 Best Overall
- Institution discretion: when the USPTO should institute or decline an IPR or PGR petition.
- Petition word limits: whether to change limits on the length of petitions.
- Separate briefing: whether parties should file separate briefs on discretionary issues.
- Settlement agreements: whether and when agreements should be filed, including settlements reached before institution.
The notice framed these as matters for consideration and public comment, not as a settled account of current PTAB procedure. The USPTO’s 2023 Federal Register notice and the later proposed-rule preamble provide the official rulemaking context.
Why the Linux Foundation opposed the proposals
The campaign argued that the proposed changes could make it harder for third parties, including organizations that challenge patents relevant to open source, to obtain PTAB review. It warned that reduced access to review could leave open source developers and users more exposed to patent assertions and increase the cost of defending against them, with small and medium-sized businesses particularly vulnerable. These were the campaign’s predictions; the cited agency notices do not establish them as measured outcomes.
The policy tension is between access to administrative review and limits intended to address concerns such as repeated or parallel challenges. The 2023 campaign emphasized the value of third-party challenges; the notice sought input on PTAB process. The materials cited here do not settle the empirical balance between those interests or establish that one side’s predicted costs would result.
Who backed the campaign
The Linux Foundation named the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), Eclipse Foundation, GNOME Foundation, Mozilla Foundation, Open Invention Network (OIN), and Unified Patents as campaign partners. A June 7, 2023 webinar featured speakers from the Linux Foundation, Unified Patents, and EFF.
Crashes, No Sound, or Screen Glitches?
Random freezes, missing sound and display glitches usually trace back to one bad driver. Find and replace yours safely.Free scan · under a minuteWindows Errors? Fix Them Before They Spread
Repair common Windows errors and clear accumulated junk for a smoother, more stable PC - no reinstall needed.Free scan · no reinstallRank #3
- Used Book in Good Condition
The campaign also pointed to Unified Patents’ Open Source Zone as a mechanism for challenging patents relevant to open source. It is an institutional patent-challenge initiative, not a consumer product. The campaign page includes statements from supporters describing why they opposed the proposals; those statements reflect their views rather than neutral agency conclusions. See the campaign announcement and webinar page.
What happened after the comment call
The stated deadline for comments was June 20, 2023, at 11:59 p.m. EDT, so that call to action is historical. The USPTO later reported that it received more than 14,500 comments during the two-month period ending on that date. That number is the agency’s count of comments on the ANPRM, not a measure of public agreement with the campaign.
PTAB policy activity continued afterward. A USPTO page describes an interim director-discretionary process announced March 26, 2025. That later development should not be conflated with the 2023 ANPRM, and the sources cited here do not establish the final disposition of the 2023 docket or every procedure now governing PTAB proceedings. For present-day procedural information, check the USPTO’s current PTAB guidance and the relevant docket records.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.What readers can do now
The original public-comment window is closed; readers cannot use it to submit a timely comment. Anyone following the issue today should start with the USPTO’s current PTAB guidance and official docket materials, then distinguish later rulemaking or guidance from the 2023 proposal. The named organizations provide context for the campaign, but their current membership, support, participation, or referral terms are not established here and should be checked directly before relying on them.
Quick Recap
Best Value
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
