Study suggests patent protection may dampen innovation

Jan 30, 2012

Results of a new study by researchers from UCI and the University of Kansas suggest that, contrary to popular belief, greater amounts of innovation, productivity and social wealth may occur when people are required to pay damages for illegally using an invention rather than prohibited from using it at all.

The study reinforces earlier findings by the researchers - UCI associate professor of informatics Bill Tomlinson and professor Andrew Torrance of the University of Kansas School of Law - offering that the most innovation may result when receive no protection from the legal system.

Using the "Patent Game," an interactive computer-based model that attempts to simulate patent systems, Tomlinson and Torrance conducted controlled experiments to evaluate the merits of property rules (which expressly prohibit people from utilizing a patent owner's ) and liability rules (which require infringers to pay damages but do not bar them from using an invention).

"Conventional wisdom says people will invent less if property rights are not strongly enforced," Torrance said. "However, we found that the threat of prohibition actually dampened innovation."

The pair's latest study appears in the spring issue of the Yale Journal of Law & Technology.

Explore further: Highly connected CEOs more likely to broker mergers and acquisitions that harm firms

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Study finds patent systems may discourage innovation

Jul 27, 2009

(PhysOrg.com) -- A new study challenges the traditional view that patents foster innovation, suggesting instead that they may hinder technological progress, economic activity and societal wealth. These results ...

US Supreme Court hears Microsoft case on patents

Apr 19, 2011

The US Supreme Court has immersed itself in patent rules in a case pitting Microsoft against a Canadian technology company that claims some versions of Word violated its patent.

Who do our genes belong to?

Sep 07, 2010

Investors in pharmaceutical, medical and biotechnological industries should not be able to patent genes that are identical to naturally occurring sequences, according to an Australian National University biotechnology patent ...

Biotechnology needs 21st century patent system: Expert

Mar 17, 2008

Biotechnology discoveries – like the method for creating synthetic life forms – are at risk of being unduly hindered or taken hostage by private corporations unless patent systems are brought into the 21st century, an ...

Recommended for you

Migrant employment on the rise

23 hours ago

Skilled migrants are enjoying better jobs and higher levels of employment thanks to a shift in policy, according to a new study by the Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research at the University ...

Three hours of life per euro

Oct 15, 2014

Public spending appears to have contributed substantially to the fact that life expectancy in eastern Germany has not only increased, but is now almost equivalent to life expectancy in the west. While the possible connection ...

User comments : 2

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

_nigmatic10
4 / 5 (4) Jan 30, 2012
As it stands right now, any would be inventor is going to pay extremely high just to get patent rights thanks to recent changes, which places such patents out of reach for any financially strapped would be inventors. this, of course, then favors established corporations as the keyholders, so to speak. Couple this with the nefarious practices of legal suppression of any patents that share similar factors, which then almost always places such a patent in the richer parties control( *cough* Apple *cough*), and whatever innovation may have existed is now filtered and controlled. End result, technology suppression.
fleem
not rated yet Jan 30, 2012
Agreed. All it takes is money to steal a patent. And once stolen, all it takes is more money to keep others from stealing it.