Apple's Patent Loss To University Of Wisconsin A Reminder That Universities Are Often The Worst Patent Trolls
from the shameful-attack-on-their-educational-mission dept
You may have heard the news this week that Apple lost a patent lawsuit filed by the University of Wisconsin, and may be on the hook for up to $862.4 million in damages. This news should serve as a reminder that universities are some of the nation's worst patent trolls, actively ignoring their own stated missions to widely spread academic research and knowledge. For example, the University of Wisconsin's stated mission is:The mission of the University of Wisconsin System is to develop human resources, to discover and disseminate knowledge, to extend knowledge and its application beyond the boundaries of its campuses, and to serve and stimulate society by developing in students heightened intellectual, cultural, and humane sensitivities, scientific, professional and technological expertise, and a sense of purpose. Inherent in this broad mission are methods of instruction, research, extended training, and public service designed to educate people and improve the human condition. Basic to every purpose of the UW System is the search for truth.Notice how much of that is about sharing knowledge and improving the world. But, of course, when UW had a chance to say "pay me!" it didn't skip a beat. And many universities are doing the same thing. It's a massive problem and it's one caused almost entirely by Congress. We've discussed this a few times before, but in 1980, Congress passed the Bayh-Dole Act, which was supposed to incentivize more research at universities by allowing those universities to patent that research. The people who supported this idea were working off the myth that patents are the main way to incentivize innovation and research. This is wrong, and from this initial mistake, lots of serious problems have flowed. The Bayh-Dole Act has been a dismal failure in many, many ways, leading to a world now where many universities have resorted to patent trolling.
What really happened in the wake of the Bayh-Dole Act, was that many universities thought that they'd (1) patent all their professors' research (2) license it and (3) profit like crazy. The reality was that they did the first part -- and then many universities set up "tech transfer offices" to try to license it. And then they ran smack dab into reality, which is that most of their patents sucked and no one wanted to license them. Making matters worse, even when they had a legitimate or interesting patent, the universities massively overvalued those patents, demanding licensing fees that were ridiculous.
The end result was a near total disaster for most universities. Rather than make money, most universities lost a ton of money between all the patent filing and the expensive tech transfer offices that were supposed to be a revenue generator, but turned out to be massive losses for the vast majority of universities that set them up (there are very few exceptions). On top of that, this rush to patent and license resulted in a secondary problem: it actually decreased research and information sharing. Historically, professors would often share research with colleagues and work together on projects. But universities started pushing them not to do that as much, because of the patents. And on top of that, it became riskier to do follow on research over fears around the patents. So the entire intent of the bill backfired drastically.
As a result, many university tech transfer offices followed one of two paths to try to justify their existence: they sold off patent portfolios to patent trolls directly (Intellectual Ventures' big initial portfolio of patents was mostly them buying junk patent portfolios from desperate universities, who needed to show some sort of return), or they started patent trolling themselves. The University of California at Berkeley became a major patent troll. As did the University of Southern California. And Carnegie Mellon. And, apparently, the University of Wisconsin as well.
This recent ruling is just the latest example of how far we've come and just how much damage the Bayh-Dole Act has done. It's not only diminished university research and important information sharing, it's now leading these universities to actively attack actual innovators and shake them down for money. If Congress really wants to fix patent trolling, it really needs to roll back the Bayh-Dole Act.
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: bayh-dole act, chips, patent trolls, patents, universities
Companies: apple, university of wisconsin
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
I can't help myself
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
But.. but.. innovation!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: But.. but.. innovation!
I think that's the very definition of innovation in some sense. Making things better... so that more people find them useful.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: But.. but.. innovation!
There are multiple aspects to innovation. Take computing applications for example. In any application there are AT LEAST 2 distinct ways to innovate.
1. Functionality/Capability. IE, how powerful of a tool it is and what can it do for the user?
2. Interface/Interactivity. IE, how easy is it for a human with no experience to use that product effectively!
No matter how great an engine is, it is worthless if that engine cannot be effectively operated.
No matter how slick an interface is, it is worthless if the engine cannot effectively perform any tasks assigned to it.
Apple for all of its corporate greed and snobbery tends to do a much better job on their interfaces compared to a lot of other tech companies. Unfortunately, you also get a lot of, our way or the highway bluster along the way.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: But.. but.. innovation!
That's one set of innovations the world would be much better off without.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: But.. but.. innovation!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: But.. but.. innovation!
Over all Apple makes good product that had a much lower support cost while only having a slightly higher purchase cost. That is until the Chromebook came along. iPads are still are a good product that I think is better then android. I think it is only a matter of time till that changes though.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: But.. but.. innovation!
Which is something in and of itself and can't be said about every company, no?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: But.. but.. innovation!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
They essentially were pioneers in University-based patent trolli, I mean licensing.
http://www.warf.org/about-us/about-us.cmsx
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
http://www.warf.org/about-us/background/history/steenbock-and-warf-s-founding/steenbock-a nd-warf-s-founding.cmsx
Much has changed since the 20s...
I'll add that UW is one of the few universities that does not automatically obtain the rights to any student invention, so among peers UW/WARF are pretty good.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
http://www.warf.org/about-us/background/history/warf-bayh-dole/warf-and-bayh-dole.cmsx
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Possibly good can come from this?
Still, hoping the money can go towards something good does not justify patent trolling. Universities shouldn't have to focus on making money, but the sad state of things is the government, especially in Wisconsin, is dead set on making it impossible for universities to NOT try and make money at every turn. They can't afford to keep being a cutting edge research institution if the state claims they should only be producing people ready for the workforce and cuts money to prove a point. I was almost hoping Scott Walker would get the nomination just so he would quit as governer (but the chance that he could have won was equally terrifying).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Possibly good can come from this?
http://www.warf.org/for-uw-inventors/for-uw-inventors.cmsx
I'm pessimistic on the value of software (and most other) patents, but I've both disclosed projects to WARF and have had early-stage research funded to the point that it was competitive for federal grants. Among the tech transfer offices, WARF is a pretty sympathetic target. And I too was hoping to foist Walker upon anyone else..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
https://budget.wisc.edu/budget-news/blank-presentation-video-available/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Talking about trolls
They do have a mission to teach, but they cannot complete that mission without money.
They have an extensive track record of research collaboration and using the money to give back to the community.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Missing the point
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
nonsense
Nonsense. If they were 'actual innovators' they wouldn't violate other institutions' patents.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: nonsense
To say that "actual innnovators" don't violate patents is logically problematic.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not that that helps public teachers, mental health care institutes, or anyone else he's screwed over at the behest of his Koch masters.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]