Planet Money Continues To Show How Damaging Software Patents Are To Innovation
from the repetition-is-good dept
Just a week after the Planet Money team did the absolutely wonderful This American Life episode on problems with the patent system, the folks there are continuing to dig into the subject. This week they have an episode that includes interviews with two of the top experts on the subject: James Bessen and Nobel Prize winning economist Eric Maskin, both of which have done tremendous research into the problems of the patent system. In the podcast beyond explaining why the patent system is hindering innovation, they also take a stab at estimating the very real "cost" on innovation.Of course, actually showing the specific costs is difficult, but Maskin and Bessen have a few different ways to show it. For example, Maskin talks about the research that shows an increase in patenting has not increased investment in R&D -- and, if anything, it's shown that investment in R&D has potentially been limited due to patents. They note that there's an overwhelming amount of evidence at this point that we would likely be seeing greater innovation "if intellectual property were relaxed." As he notes there are numerous "natural experiments" that provide data to support this.
Separately, they discuss Bessen's research into how much the market has valued the "loss" due to bogus software patent lawsuits from patent trolls. That research shows that patent trolls have basically evaporated half a trillion dollars in value and wealth from companies that are actually innovating. And yet, all Congress can do is pass a useless patent reform bill that doesn't even come close to dealing with these issues.
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: eric maskin, james bessen, patents, planet money, software patents
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Off topic
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Although I don't know if software does that more or less than normal inventions I would say that it will get to be doing it more and more over the years.
On the other hand people do get enabl(ed)ing disclosures of the technology. Although this is debatable as to whether or not one (or the public) would want or need an enabl(ed)ing disclosure of some software.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
You can't use them to write code; therefore you can't reproduce the "invention". They are written in legalese, and until they write a legalese compiler, they are useless.
Something that hasn't been touched on is how many open source projects have been closed down by patent threats from large companies. I've seen several projects shut down, but thanks to the EU having more sense than the US in the software world, the projects have sprung back up where the patents are invalid.
Oh yeah, that's another point not touched on: software patents only work in the US. Use the same algorithm as someone else in the EU, no problem. Use that technique in the US, and you have "stolen" someone else’s "technology." And lest we forget, software is a collection of algorithms akin to lists, recipes and mathematical formulas, none of which are patentable.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
I thought it would be a good idea to try to, but then I realized that there's probably a patent on it, so now I'm too afraid to.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Theoretical:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hang on a sec here ...
Come on Mike, let's not fall into the same trap you accuse the IP Maximalists of! ;-}
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Hang on a sec here ...
The whole business sector of luxury prostitutes and expensive designer drugs depends on this money.
This is generating American jobs.
And really, without these fringe benefits, where would the incentive be for people to become IP lawyers, power hungry CEOs or corrupt politicians?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Hang on a sec here ...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Hang on a sec here ...
But perhaps you didn't detect the sarcasm in my post? Or are you a troll? (Damn, I really NEED a "sarcasm font!!")
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
AC #6 Re: Hang on a sec here ...
If people will buy a company for x dollars on day one, they do so.
If people value a company at x/2, they never would have bought it for x.
That doesn't mean the buyer didn't have the other x/2; just that the company didn't have a value of x.
Freakonomics is a great read!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Hang on a sec here ...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Hang on a sec here ...
Just like how giving welfare money to people who don't want to work(not saying welfare people don't want to work, but many don't).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Hang on a sec here ...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Hang on a sec here ...
When people feel good about handing over the money, they will happily do it again. Result: you prosper.
When people feel unpleasant about handing over the money, they will look for ways to avoid doing it again. Result: you suffer.
A thriving economy is about people willingly exchanging goods and services and money, not being seen as parasites off each other.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Hang on a sec here ...
> They are merely redirected to different places in the economy
Using that logic, protection rackets are great for the economy.
A guy comes to your business. "Hey, nice business you have there. It would be a shame if anything were to happen to it."
Just pay 25 % of your profits to the extortionist, to prevent something bad from happening to your business.
That money didn't just evaporate. It was merely redirected to different places in the economy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Hang on a sec here ...
Unless the money is being physically destroyed, it is still there. It makes the whole story laughable that it's hung on something that Mike has "debunked" before. So either he doesn't believe his debunking, or he is just trying to mislead all of you in this case. I wonder which one it is?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
My costs
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Without going round on patents again: real problem is lawyers.
Anyhoo, lawyers have built most of the problems with patents into the system as barriers to other people that also provide lawyers with lucrative niches, so can't attack this problem without looking at lawyers and what they get from it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Without going round on patents again: real problem is lawyers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Piracy has "evaporated" billions of dollars out of the recorded music industry. Yet, Mike will tell you it's okay, they money went somewhere else and was spent in the economy.
Yet, when "patent trolls" license technology for a billion dollars, that money has just "evaporated". Yup, that's right, because there is a patent involved, that money actually disappears and never comes back. They guys who get it never spend it, never invest it, never do anything with it, they just shovel it into a furnace and burn it.
It's amazing that anyone can take you seriously Mike.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Billions of dollars has "evaporated" from the recorded music industry.
You would have to be the ultimate in head in the sand person to day that recorded music sales aren't down, and down sharply, and you would also have to deny that people today have huge collections of music. Since those two facts don't add up together to make sales, we know what happened.
Now, how come piracy doesn't make money evaporate (even as the music industry sees billions of sales a year evaporate), yet someone enforcing a patent makes money evaporate, and somehow magically removes it from the economy?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
> person to day that recorded music sales aren't down,
> and down sharply
You manage to contradict yourself. Today you say sales are down sharply. Other times you say they are up. Which is it?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Please show where I ever suggested recorded music sales are up.
by the way, clever attempt to dislodge the discussion... I know that I have once again caught Mike in an incredible contradiction, but I doubt he will reply to it. Even if he replies in the thread, it will no doubt be some sort of vaguely worded "you don't understand economics" or "you are an idiot" type of answer, without addressing the contradiction.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Now let's take one more step in the logic chain
Any doctor - and any sensible engineer - would tell you that what you have to fix is the root cause, not try to patch the symptom...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Software patents
Good article.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
the point is over there guys....
The point your all missing is about the new money that will never happen. All of the start ups that fail to gain a foot hold, the new innovations that the original 'inventor' didn't think of but still somehow infringe their patent, the chance for more American companies to produce competing products to sell in a global market and a hundred other revenue streams /job providors that never happen because it's possible to patent a line of code or a geometric shape.
Seriously if you an get a patent on moving a finger across a screen then something is broken.
If only one company in the country is allowed to produce a 'device that streams music ' then something is broken. It doesn't take a genius,inventor, patent lawyer or elementary school kid to see that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: the point is over there guys....
"If only one company in the country is allowed to produce a 'device that streams music ' then something is broken."
The scope of a patent if defined by its claims. Frankly, I have never seen one in any industry where the claims are of such scope that prospective market entrants are locked out. Yet, some here would have others believe "lock out" is the rule. Clearly it is not and never has been.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]