Technological Innovation and Intellectual Property
Summary:
Patents as property I
The idea that patents can be analyzed as a property system both
regarding its strengths and its weaknesses seems to be gaining currency
in influential circles. This post reports on a recent editorial in the
Wall Street Journal.
What s wrong with software patents?
This post, continuing summaries from Patent Failure, reviews the
evidence on whether software patents have a particular problem, and, if
so, what it is and how it might be fixed.
Patent sharks
Summary of recent articles on patent sharks, both old and new.
IP and startups
Theoretical model explores a novel effect of patents for startup firms.
They start off on the wrong foot with this statement:
We (Bessen and Meurer) received a nice note from Judge Plager letting us know that he cited our book, Patent Failure, in his recent speech where he called for rethinking patent law by returning to its origins in property law.
Patent law was not founded in property law. It was founded in monopoly grants (letters patent) by the State (kings and later legislatures). One of the first patents was given to a Florentine architect so he could have a monopoly over a marble hoisting device. Patents were later awarded for the production of basic commodities, such as salt.
It was only in 1623 that the Statute of Monopolies rationalized patents by excluding those for the production of commodities and narrowing its scope in other ways.
So the judge put the law and property cart before the monopoly horse. Property law was modified to accomodate patent monopolies. Patents were not borne in property law, but in state grants of monopoly privilege, and in the interference of the rights of entrepreneurs to compete against producers armed with patents.
The same thing is true for copyright.
