Are Patents An Encumbrance?

1086 Words3 Pages

Are patents an encumbrance? When a firm is articulating their innovation strategy, determining how to keep control of their intellectual assets is crucial. That is because companies who are heavily reliant on research and development inherent value in intangible assets and other intellectual property (IP) compared to material assets (Henkel and Reitzig, 2008). But, of course this varies between different industries in managing those valuable resources to a business i.e. pharmaceutical and biotechnology) heavily rely on patents (Thomas, 2003). A patent gives an inventor a period of 20 years to stop other corporations from making, using or selling the invention in question without the permission of the investor (Out-Law.com, 2016) hence giving the investor a short-term monopoly. The main purpose of the patent system is to encourage innovation and the improvement of industrial techniques (Out-Law.com, 2016). However, this is open to debate, Boldrin and Levine (2013), claim there is no empirical evidence that patents serve to promote innovation and productivity. In the UK and other economies, patent ‘trolls’ are misusing the patent system which then serves as a hindrance to innovation. This leads to the question – are patents hurting innovation? I will critically explore patenting, patent sharks and consider recommendations made by authors for policy-makers. Patents do not impede innovation but help knowledge-sharing across industries. Japan’s Assistant Secretary of State Korehiyo Takahashi visited the U.S Patent Office in 1888 wrote, “what is it that makes the United States such a great nation? ' And we investigated and we found that it was patents, and we will have patents”. This indicates the patent system played a pivotal role i... ... middle of paper ... ...ort from venture capital. Thus, patents play an important role in terms of reducing uncertainty and alleviating information asymmetries (Mensa, Hegde and Ljungqvist, 2015). Hence, reforms of the patent system need to facilitate the above. The implication otherwise would run the risk inhibiting the available capital for innovative start-ups. However, the authors research is based on the USA and thus, the empirical evidence cannot be generalised. In conclusion, patents do not impede innovation but the patent system employed allows patent sharks targeting start-ups. Abolishing the patent system as suggested by Boldrin and Levine (2013), is imprudent and risky which would then provide implications to innovators. However, further research is required to investigate how the patent system can be better articulated to avoid patent sharks and protect innovative entrepreneurs.

Open Document