Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 5th Feb 2013 16:49 UTC
Legal "The case against patents can be summarized briefly: there is no empirical evidence that they serve to increase innovation and productivity, unless productivity is identified with the number of patents awarded - which, as evidence shows, has no correlation with measured productivity. Both theory and evidence suggest that while patents can have a partial equilibrium effect of improving incentives to invent, the general equilibrium effect on innovation can be negative. A properly designed patent system might serve to increase innovation at a certain time and place. Unfortunately, the political economy of government-operated patent systems indicates that such systems are susceptible to pressures that cause the ill effects of patents to grow over time. Our preferred policy solution is to abolish patents entirely and to find other legislative instruments, less open to lobbying and rent seeking, to foster innovation when there is clear evidence that laissez-faire undersupplies it. However, if that policy change seems too large to swallow, we discuss in the conclusion a set of partial reforms that could be implemented." Written by economics professors Michelle Boldrin and David K. Levine, published in the winter issue of the Journal of Economic Perspectives. Via John Siracusa.
Thread beginning with comment 551628
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[9]: one easy limitation
by some1 on Wed 6th Feb 2013 13:41 UTC in reply to "RE[8]: one easy limitation"
Member since:

What I mean is they should judge the patent through the scope of one who is "ordinarily skilled in the art". Exceptional talent at deciphering legalese is not generally relevant nor should it be - yet that is nearly the sole area of experience with the average patent clerk. If it is a software patent one ordinarily skilled in the art should be able to read it - i.e. someone skilled in software should be reviewing a software patent...

Exactly. It's not reasonable to expect PTO to have people skilled in every field they grant patents, though. So you need switch from clerk reviews to peer reviews.

Edited 2013-02-06 13:43 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2