# How would lack of patents affect innovation? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 21, 2009, 2:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-lack-of-patents-affect-innovation/507199 "2009-08-21T14:21:30Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 18\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![JThunder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e95f7d/32.png) [@JThunder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JThunder)\ **Post date:** [August 22, 2009, 3:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-lack-of-patents-affect-innovation/507199/21 "2009-08-22T03:52:41Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > Back on topic, would it improve matters if it was possible to challenge a patent? That way, if someone else patents something and won’t let you use it, and you can find prior art, you could get the patent overturned so you could still use it. You can already do that. It’s nothing new. ---
**Author:** ![JWT\_Kottekoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/3ec8ea/32.png) [@JWT\_Kottekoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JWT_Kottekoe)\ **Post date:** [August 22, 2009, 3:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-lack-of-patents-affect-innovation/507199/22 "2009-08-22T03:56:34Z")
I believe that on balance the patent system inhibits innovation. This is not unique to our time. One can argue persuasively that innovation in steam engines kicked into high gear when James Watt’s patents expired. On the other hand, it is certainly the case that some form of protection is needed in the pharmaceutical industry. The idea of getting rid of FDA testing is ludicrous. The cost of developing a fundamentally new drug is inescapably large, if we want it to be both effective and safe. If it takes $1B to develop a drug, and the entry barriers are miniscule, no one is going to make the investment. Once the working compound has been found and proven, a smart graduate student, a garage, and a hundred thousand dollars may be all that is required to surmount the entry barrier. I think the fundamental mistake in our patent system is to think that the idea itself has tremendous value. Anyone who has done real R&D knows that ideas are cheap. The value is in figuring out which ideas really work, in developing the product, and in successfully manufacturing and marketing it. 99.9% of the value comes after the inventive step and most patents are useless. I’d like to see a patent system that rewards hard work and not the bozos who get a patent on something obvious, then sit on their hind ends waiting for Apple or someone else to develop and market it so they can sue. ---
**Author:** ![erislover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/71e660/32.png) [@erislover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/erislover)\ **Post date:** [August 22, 2009, 8:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-lack-of-patents-affect-innovation/507199/23 "2009-08-22T08:09:34Z")
> [@Voyager](#): > > Racing to productize known research results can cause duplication, but the market will determine who does it best - and fastest. Sounds great. So how 'bout them patents? ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2009, 5:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-lack-of-patents-affect-innovation/507199/24 "2009-08-23T05:54:06Z")
> [@erislover](#): > > Sounds great. So how 'bout them patents? Patents mean the fastest wins, assuming that the two approaches are identical. Without that, the market may not be big enough for both companies to make a profit. If the systems are not identical, they can fight (since patents won’t force either out of the market) or they can cross-license so that they both can produce a better product. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2009, 10:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-lack-of-patents-affect-innovation/507199/25 "2009-08-23T10:32:46Z")
Just fwiw, the US laws were changed a couple of years ago so that patent priority goes to the first to invent, just as in the rest of the world, not to the first to file anymore. ---
**Author:** ![Cicero](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cicero/32/3594_2.png) [@Cicero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cicero)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2009, 10:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-lack-of-patents-affect-innovation/507199/26 "2009-08-23T10:56:00Z")
I don’t know a lot about these matters so please humour me. Do patents really work in the sense that so many games seem to be pirated despite intellectual property rights. If I invent a time machine (you heard it here first) and lodge a patent, how much information do I need to provide the Patent Office? Enough so some flunky could sell the details to someone in China who could immediately rip off my design? I guess they could do that by buying one and reverse engineering it. If so, what recourse do I have? ---
**Author:** ![Isamu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/7c8e57/32.png) [@Isamu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Isamu)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2009, 12:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-lack-of-patents-affect-innovation/507199/27 "2009-08-23T12:24:22Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > There are only 3 places a patent is normally filed now - the US, Japan, and the European Patent Office. It’s pretty much automated now, and the laws are now harmonized globally including reciprocity. The total number of patents filed in China last year was approximately 782,000, and that’s about twice what was filed in the US which is the second highest filer. I don’t know what you mean by “automated”. The laws in each country are still different enough to require the hiring of professionals who understand the peculiarities for each system. ---
**Author:** ![Isamu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/7c8e57/32.png) [@Isamu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Isamu)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2009, 12:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-lack-of-patents-affect-innovation/507199/28 "2009-08-23T12:28:18Z")
> [@Cicero](#): > > I don’t know a lot about these matters so please humour me. Do patents really work in the sense that so many games seem to be pirated despite intellectual property rights. If I invent a time machine (you heard it here first) and lodge a patent, how much information do I need to provide the Patent Office? Enough so some flunky could sell the details to someone in China who could immediately rip off my design? > I guess they could do that by buying one and reverse engineering it. If so, what recourse do I have? Piracy of games is a copyright issue, not really relevant here. If you invent a time machine and you want to get a patent for it, you need to cough up enough information that someone in your field of science could replicate the machine or the effect. So, yes, enough that someone could sell the details to someone else in China who could rip off your design. But there are laws and systems in place to help prevent that. ---
**Author:** ![MsRobyn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/90ced4/32.png) [@MsRobyn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MsRobyn)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2009, 12:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-lack-of-patents-affect-innovation/507199/29 "2009-08-23T12:53:41Z")
Patents in one area can force innovation in others. For example, Thomas Edison controlled the patent rights for movie production and (IIRC) exhibition in New York. In order for others to make movies without having to pay exorbitant royalties to Edison, they had to find another place to do it, so off to Hollywood they went. In doing so, they were able to work beyond Edison’s reach, and effectively created an industry that was larger than Edison’s might have been. ---
**Author:** ![JWT\_Kottekoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/3ec8ea/32.png) [@JWT\_Kottekoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JWT_Kottekoe)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2009, 4:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-lack-of-patents-affect-innovation/507199/30 "2009-08-23T16:17:08Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > Just fwiw, the US laws were changed a couple of years ago so that patent priority goes to the first to invent, just as in the rest of the world, not to the first to file anymore. This is not true. Almost all countries use a first-to-file rule. The exception to this rule is the United States, which uses a first-to-invent system and has done so since the 18th century. if passed, the patent reform bills that are now before congress may eliminate the first-to-invent system. “Good riddance”, I say. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2009, 7:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-lack-of-patents-affect-innovation/507199/31 "2009-08-23T19:08:01Z")
Ah, you’re right, I had forgotten that the Patent Reform Act of 2005, then 2007, now 2009 has not yet passed. Sorry. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2009, 7:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-lack-of-patents-affect-innovation/507199/32 "2009-08-23T19:47:41Z")
Quoth **erislover** : > [@](#): > > Suppose when a patent was granted it went up for auction, the winning bid going entirely to the inventor(s). 90% of the time, the government steps in, pays the winning bid (which it didn’t make) and immediately places the patent in the public domain. 10% of the time, the winner is actually granted the patent. We know that in the general case, the inventor(s) receive fair compensation. But 90% of the time, there’s no shitty monopoly. I can see the flaw in this one right off the bat. The company (or other patent-filer) will itself take part in the auction, and bid up the price ludicrously high. If the government takes over the buy, then they’ve just gotten a ludicrously large sum of money, and if they don’t, then they’re just transferring money from their left pocket to their right pocket. ---
**Author:** ![Never\_Say\_Dice](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/ee59a6/32.png) [@Never\_Say\_Dice](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Never_Say_Dice)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2009, 9:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-lack-of-patents-affect-innovation/507199/33 "2009-08-23T21:43:17Z")
Many of the Founding Fathers, like John Adams were fully opposed to patents and copyrights, as they were simply methods to entrench the rich and powerful. For decades I thought, why on earth can’t other tissue brands have pop-up tissues just because Kleenex got there first? Fine, one company got rich. But for decades? Why? This is the government, US, handing a huge bonus to somebody out of our collective pockets. A tissue tax and corporate welfare for decades. Give them the Medal of Honor instead or a Nobel Prize, but leave our collective pockets out of it. ---
**Author:** ![SentientMeat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/43a26b/32.png) [@SentientMeat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SentientMeat)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2009, 12:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-lack-of-patents-affect-innovation/507199/34 "2009-08-24T12:43:36Z")
[QUOTE=erislover] Don’t do that, then. [/quote] Don’t do that research, you mean? In that case, it’s possible that the research will simply not get done at all. (Indeed, even universities and other publicaly funded research programs are beginning to patent first and ask questions later.) > [@](#): > > Why? Extracting rent from everyone to serve a few is a necessary evil? If the benefits for _many_, derived from that rent paid to a few, would be diminished, that is a necessary evil in my book. I was surprised to find out how close to the knuckle even large research programs are run, such that even with a 20 year monopoly on a “winner”, you’re _still_ not that far in the black overall (and note that medical trials might last a decade before you can even get the thing to market). Without the monopoly, I’m sure accountants would just see red bars almost everywhere. > [@](#): > > Suppose when a patent was granted it went up for auction, the winning bid going entirely to the inventor(s). 90% of the time, the government steps in, pays the winning bid (which it didn’t make) and immediately places the patent in the public domain. 10% of the time, the winner is actually granted the patent. We know that in the general case, the inventor(s) receive fair compensation. But 90% of the time, there’s no shitty monopoly. It’s actually pretty easy to get a patent granted (hence my “bar raising” suggestion), such that I would simply crank out several barely innovative patents per day for the governement to waste its money on and target the _true_ patents disproportionately. > [@](#): > > 90% of the time, the invention can be put to immediate use by those who can use it best without contractual overhead. Win-win? Many patents are barely ‘better’ than what is in the public domain already, yet the government is paying over the odds for them. Big lose, I say. > [@](#): > > Is there no room for improvement in our patent system? The only way to benefit the economy is to grant monopolies which we know are not good for the economy? Hmmm. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with monopolies _per se_ - after all, monopolistic use of houses, cars and everything else is what **property** is. Raising the inventiveness bar would be a benefit in terms of filtering out unworthy crap. And 20 years isn’t _too_ long, I reckon. Compared to the immortal monster of Copyright, it’s eminently reasonable. ---
**Author:** ![Superfluous\_Parentheses](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/8edcca/32.png) [@Superfluous\_Parentheses](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Superfluous_Parentheses)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2009, 1:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-lack-of-patents-affect-innovation/507199/35 "2009-08-24T13:10:15Z")
> [@Henrichek](#): > > I won’t speak for all areas of innovation, but as a software engineer I am convinced that software patents surely do stifle innovation. They are used as weapons by large corporations and become pretty much a minefield for all software developers. It’s nearly impossible to check for prior patents for every line of code you write without a legal department the size of IBM’s or Microsoft’s, actually, even they can’t. Actually, you don’t even **want** to check for patents in software, since 1. You’re pretty much guaranteed to find not one but quite a few patents for each decent-sized piece of software, mostly by just choosing “the most obvious solution” to a problem. 2. When you’re found guilty of infringing a patent, you run the risk of much higher sanctions if it can be proofed that you were aware of the patent. In short, software patents are extremely poisonous to any developer who’s not already got a whole bunch of patents (which are then used as bargaining tools to get around other people’s patents, and to keep the smaller competition out of the way). [And even then, you’re not safe](http://blogs.computerworld.com/14536/you_cant_buy_ms_word_i4i_xml_patent_ruling) ---
**Author:** ![iamthewalrus\_3](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/258eb7/32.png) [@iamthewalrus\_3](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iamthewalrus_3)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2009, 11:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-lack-of-patents-affect-innovation/507199/36 "2009-08-24T23:39:15Z")
> [@erislover](#): > > Suppose when a patent was granted it went up for auction, the winning bid going entirely to the inventor(s). 90% of the time, the government steps in, pays the winning bid (which it didn’t make) and immediately places the patent in the public domain. 10% of the time, the winner is actually granted the patent. We know that in the general case, the inventor(s) receive fair compensation. But 90% of the time, there’s no shitty monopoly. Which government? ---
**Author:** ![Number43](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/58956e/32.png) [@Number43](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Number43)\ **Post date:** [August 25, 2009, 7:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-lack-of-patents-affect-innovation/507199/37 "2009-08-25T07:01:49Z")
> [@erislover](#): > > Suppose when a patent was granted it went up for auction, the winning bid going entirely to the inventor(s). 90% of the time, the government steps in, pays the winning bid (which it didn’t make) and immediately places the patent in the public domain. 10% of the time, the winner is actually granted the patent. We know that in the general case, the inventor(s) receive fair compensation. But 90% of the time, there’s no shitty monopoly. > > Win? > > 90% of the time, the invention can be put to immediate use by those who can use it best without contractual overhead. Win-win? > > 90% of the time, the economy as a whole immediately benefits and in the long run, the government collects more in taxes from the improvement to the economy happening sooner rather than later. Win-win-win? > > 90% too much, how about 75%? 50%? Is there no room for improvement in our patent system? The only way to benefit the economy is to grant monopolies which we know are not good for the economy? Hmmm. So what you are proposing is some sort of government bounty on good inventions? That is a bad idea from a perspective of the possibility of fraud. If it really works like an auction with the government deciding to win most, people would get friends to make dummy bids and hope the government tops it, otherwise you’ll have people bribing officials to get paid more for their invention. Also people would be patenting things which aren’t really practical but might seem to be without a really thorough investigation in hopes of getting big government checks. Also, what about things invented in foreign countries, or the use of things invented here in foreign countries? ---
**Author:** ![Isamu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/7c8e57/32.png) [@Isamu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Isamu)\ **Post date:** [August 26, 2009, 1:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-lack-of-patents-affect-innovation/507199/38 "2009-08-26T01:42:02Z")
> [@Number43](#): > > Also, what about things invented in foreign countries, or the use of things invented here in foreign countries? You boob. Things aren’t invented in other countries - they’re invented in the USA and then copied in other countries. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-lack-of-patents-affect-innovation/507199.md?page=1)