Not how it works, actually. The system changed in 2013 and now whoever is first to file gets the patent, even if someone else can demonstrate prior art.
This is not true - prior art is still a test for striking down a patent in court, it is just not taken into account when two entities are competing to file the same patent at the same time.
> Not how it works, actually. The system changed in 2013 and now whoever is first to file gets the patent, even if someone else can demonstrate prior art.
This is not true, and it's a really damaging misrepresentation.
First to file deals with interference between parallel applications, it doesn't change prior art based on publication.
If two parties show up claiming patents on the same thing based on unpublished work, under the prior rules the party that was willing to fabricate the earliest date of invention won, under current rules the first to file wins.
The misinformation you're spreading is particularly pernicious because the change increased the incentives for publishing your work early and often (to establish prior art ASAP)-- but the misinterpretation implies you should avoid publishing at all costs (to avoid a third party dishonestly patenting your publications).
https://www.justia.com/intellectual-property/patents/first-t...
AMD should have filed their own patents before talking about it publicly - that's how the game is now played.
If you don't - it's now possible for someone else to file a patent on your own invention.