It's Techdirt's 20th Anniversary! Check out today's 
RSS
A Tiny Bit Of Good News On Patent Reform
from the just-a-tiny-bit dept
While we believe strongly that the patent system often goes against its original purpose of encouraging innovation, we still get pretty nervous whenever politicians start talking about patent reform -- because it often seems like their reforms would only make the system worse. That's not to say it's not well-intentioned, but the unintended consequences will often create the opposite result than the politicians expect. There is one tiny bit of good news, however. When the House Subcommittee on intellectual property issues held hearings yesterday about patent reform, they heard from a group of folks who mostly have an excellent grasp of the problems the system faces. The folks in the room at least heard more accurate descriptions of many of the problems with the system than what you hear normally. The panel included economist Adam Jaffe, who literally wrote a book about the problems of the patent system and the unintended consequences of certain changes to the system in the past. I don't agree with some of Jaffe's suggestions on how to repair the system -- but it's good new to hear that his description of the problems of the system is being heard.
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Patent reform...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
familiar with how the system works. Has he prosecuted one
single application? NO!!!
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
familiar with how the system works. Has he prosecuted one
single application? NO!!!
And that's a good thing. As we were explaining the other day, looking only to patent attorneys to figure out how the patent system should work is like asking only automotive execs how car safety should work. They're inherently biased in one direction.
Patent attorneys look at the mechanism and at how it impacts themselves. Economists (like Jaffe) are more able to step back and look at the overall system to see if there's a net benefit or a net negative.
By the way, to say that he is not familiar with how the system works is laughable. Go read his book and explain how he doesn't know how the system works. I'm guessing he understands it a lot better than someone who insists that you can only understand the system if he's prosecuted an application.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Prof Jaffe
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
...Who do I sue?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Add Your Comment