Dear CNN: Patents Are Not A Proxy For Innovation
from the get-real dept
We've seen it over and over again in the press. They love to assume that the number of patents being filed is a proxy for innovation. There's just one (large) problem with that. Multiple studies have shown no connection between patents and innovation. But, don't tell that to the reporters at CNN who are fretting about how the "recession" has taken its latest victim: US Innovation. This is ridiculous on so many levels that even patent system defenders are disagreeing with CNN. First, CNN bases this on a minuscule 2.3% decline in patent filings, despite a massive growth in patent filings over the past fifteen years.But, more importantly, there is no indication whatsoever that this means anything in terms of US innovation. No one at CNN seemed to think it was even worth trying to actually back up that claim with any evidence whatsoever. If innovation were really declining in the US, you would think there would be some sort of tangible evidence of it, but CNN and reporter David Goldman never bother to even look for it. Tragically, USPTO boss David Kappos -- who should know better -- perpetuates the myth that the two are directly connected. In commenting on the decline in patent applications, he notes:
"That's unfortunate because [patent filings] are a reflection of innovation," said David Kappos, director of the Patent Office. "Innovation creates so many jobs and so much opportunity for our country. It is absolutely key to our long-term success in the global economy."But, of course, there is no indication that this tiny drop in applications is reflective of anything at all when it comes to innovation. It could be a whole variety of factors, from firms recognizing what a waste it is to patent certain things, to companies deciding not to waste money on patents during a recession, to the various court rulings that have finally put a tiny pushback on what is considered "patentable." But none of that suggests any limit on US innovation or ingenuity. And, it's even more ridiculous to claim, as Kappos appears to do in that quote, that this drop in patent applications could represent a decrease in jobs and opportunity. That statement is even more laughable, since Kappos must know that the number of jobs created is not even remotely related to the number of patents granted or held (just ask some patent hoarding firms that hold many patents but employ just one or two people). What a shame that Kappos would repeat such myths. As boss of the PTO, perhaps he feels it's his mission to overstate the importance of the organization, but his claims should have at least some basis in reality.
But, of course, a good explanation for why this is happening is explained (though, not by the CNN reporter who appears to miss it entirely) later in the article: the USPTO is entirely funded by patent application fees. Thus, it has every incentive to get more people to file, and to play up the prestige and value of a patent, even when the evidence is to the contrary. So, now it appears that CNN becomes the PR arm of the Patent Office, rather than actually looking to find out what's going on.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: david kappos, innovation, jobs, patents
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
So perhaps there's some connection there even though patents and innovation don't have a direct connection, the absence could indicate something intangible.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
or it could be a sign that ... "Everything that can be invented has been invented." ... Big ole Grin
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
That's unfortunate because [patent filings] are a reflection of innovation
Patent applications are a reflection of innovation, or at least a leading indicator. Is it a perfect measurement? Nope. It's just an indication, a reflection of what is going on.
You may go to argue that changing the paint color on something or adding a winky light on an existing product is innovation, but most of us look at innovation as doing something new, not the process of narrowly refining existing product lines. As such, a decline in the number of patents is a pretty good indication in a decline in new innovative ideas that merit a patent.
Oh yeah, and if you take away the Apple security tape, that number gets worse.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: (I always feed ferrets to my Ugly Anaconda)
Just one other possibility among many.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: (I always feed ferrets to my Ugly Anaconda)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Just a single one. I'll be happy from that point on.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The point is, there is no correlation. Fewer patent applications this year just means that fewer people applied for patents this year.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
You're pretty good at the gay-baiting vulgarity, not so great with the reasoning.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Let's see, companies losing money and laying people off. Economy in the shitter. R&D budgets cutback. Patent applications off. Gee it all sort of follows, doesn't it?
It's a simple explaination, but the tinfoilers can't find the conspiracy and thus are not happy with the simple and correct answer.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Hell, by your own logic, there's been zero innovation until patent systems appeared.
Quite simply, no. The patent system is just an INDICATION, not a cause. The patent system in and of itself doesn't create anything (except occasional fodder for Mike to chew on). The patent system is just a system, and measuring the number of patent applications is just an indicator of activity to develop new things, innovative enough to potentially merit a patent.
You are confusing cause and effect. Remember, the wall doesn't hit your head, it's your head hitting the wall.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
The fact that there are more/less patent applications does not mean there is more/less activity of any other kind.
If your hypothesis held any water whatsoever, then we should be seeing drops in particular types of patent applications in accordance with drops in related sectors. Some sectors have been massively gutted in this economic downturn while some other have actually survived untouched, and yet others are thriving.
So where is the evidence to back this "applications ~~ invention"?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
--Richard
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Invention != Innovation
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
American Innovation?
We make about half of our revenues outside the US; we spend about half of our R&D budget outside the US; most of our patents are filed worldwide... It might be easier for CNN to tell the "USA vs the world" story, but in each of our businesses, the truth is it is "us vs the other 3-4 companies who are really good at this also."
And patents as an innovation indicator? Patents are for innovations you're willing to disclose. A lot of the real innovation is protected as a trade secret - business processes, manufacturing methods, even financing models.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Patents and innovation
Due to the lack of campaign finance reform (welfare for the wealthy results) and the USPTO being "self-supporting" we have developed a system that inhibits innovation, and is increasingly doing so - we are spiraling toward our own demise in technology!
As originally intended by the founding fathers, IP laws are good; as implemented by people the wealthy own, they are horrible!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Small Business and Patents
David Cox Jr.
CEO/Founder
Barcode Security Systems
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Innovation Is Alive and Well
[ link to this | view in chronology ]