Patent System Hinders Innovation

is American industry at too much risk of lawsuits to remain competitive? Should companies trying to develop drugs be given immunity from lawsuits?

gotten to the patent before them allowing for them to create a monopoly. The Capitalists if the

Patent Infringement Litigation. Nonpracticing companies are firms that do not create inventions, rather buy patents in order to sell licenses to other organizations interested in utilizing or commercializing the invention. Nonproducing companies like Bellevue, Washington-based Intellectual Ventures, argue that licensing of patent rights supports innovation, as they are able to broker access to companies and individuals that have the capacity to do something with the intellectual property (e.g. develop or apply the technology in the marketplace). Nonproducing companies aggressively defend their patents by filing patent infringement lawsuits in federal court against companies or groups of companies that that they believe have infringed on their patents. The focus on litigation is in fact a core component of these firms

Invention is the result of a long study, research, and experimentation (Innovation, n.d.); Innovation is “the discovery and the execution of pioneering ideas that create value” (Greco, 2011), in other words, new application of known concepts. A practical example of invention is the alkaline battery that provided a light-weight, small, and portable power source; innovation applied this concept to anything possible from communication devises, mecanich and construction tools, and even toys. Technical workstream leaders understand that innovators are today’s competitors reducing times, and maximazing profits with new techniques; but inventors have the potential to reshape the landscape of today’s markets leaving dominant companies out of bussiness. Who remembers door-to-door salesmen or “dear John”

In the United States, patent-eligible subject matter includes four statutory categories as defined by 35 U.S.C. § 101 of the U.S. Code. Specifically, these four categories include “any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof.” In 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court in Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int’l further expanded

Innovation of research for diseases is a key part to their treatment, and Crichton and Calfee disagree whether patents barrier this research. When an item or idea is patented it means it's owned; therefore no one else can use it without the owner's permission. Michael Crichton discusses how patents are

“Patent thicket” is the term used by Calfee when describing the phenomena of patents hindering research (444). In his essay, he dedicates a number of paragraphs to this trend and elaborates on his opinion that gene patenting does not in any way hinder research. The first piece of evidence used by the former AEI scholar is an account where NAS conducted two surveys and both found a very minimal amount of evidence that pointed to patents hindering researchers (444), and from this he found out that researches hardly ever fret over whether or not a gene has a patent on it (445). In addition to talking about whether or not a patent halts research, he also discusses price. He addresses that gene patented tests are expensive, something both him and Crichton agree on, but also says that there is no difference in price compared to tests for genes that do not have patents on them (Calfee 445). This may be true in some cases, but Crichton brings up a defense for that statement and references a test for breast cancer that would be one thousand dollars but instead costs three thousand because the gene they test for has a patent on it. The novelist continues on this topic by shining a light on the idea that an outcome of gene patenting is the halting of innovation and negative effects on patients (441). Crichton holds extreme opinions on this topic and discusses what else comes with a gene patent besides the original gene. He states that in some cases, the owner of a gene can also be entitled to all of the mutations that occur in it as well (Crichton 442). He also strongly believes that the researchers will shy away from trying to conduct studies on genes and diseases related to that gene if they are patented, such as the disease SARS (Crichton 442). All and all both scholars have strong

America was founded upon key attributes that allowed its citizens to prosper which in turn created a progressive society. These same factors–an individual’s freedom of choice, the right to own property, free trade and competition, minimal government, and national security–are still relevant in today’s world.

The patenting race takes advantage of the same computer technology that made the sequencing possible. Companies seeking patents have been using automated DNA-sequencing machines to identify genes easily and cheaply. At the time when they file for the patents,

-There were big risks in going ahead with development before the granting of a patent.

Innovators are so scared that they have gone to far extents just to please dominant NPE cities, such as Marshall, Texas. Samsung has built a ice rink in Marshall, Texas to please the city so the court goes to their favor since there is a strong NPE influence. Samsung has to maintain the ice rink in a dry hot landscape just to please a court system for every time they are sued repeatedly for every little issue in their electronic products. People may wonder, why are NPEs so successful in these cities? NPE cases are taken by many judges because NPEs can help influence the court system to have the judges re-elected so many judges use the opportunity to take patent cases and go in favor of the NPE or plaintiff, person suing/prosecuting (usually NPE). High rank federal judges even make laws in favor of patent trolls and place patent cases to be held in high influential NPE cities and this occurs,

The next reasons humans are the main cause of technology being limited is because we don’t collaborate with other companies well. In today’s society large companies will not collaborate because every company wants to be ahead of the other. Large companies will do anything to make their name bigger than other companies. The only way to get two companies to collaborate is if one company has a patent that needs to be used for another company. For example, Samsung has been using a type of glass that is flexible and very hard to crack. Apple couldn’t just copy what Samsung did, they had to purchase phones displays directly from apple.

Children at a young age are exposed to technology which fascinates them, but they rather use their device instead of playing outside. Patents spend their money on luxuries instead of using their money on a necessity like food preferably healthy. Americans blame fast food industries for having cheap prices on “food”, because they already spent their money on a luxury, some might’ve paid their bills and are left with no money. But you can’t blame the government for your bad eating habits, because there’s many opportunities to get a well paying job or even start your

A patent is an exclusive right granted for an invention, product or process that provides a new way of doing something, or that offers a new technical solution to a problem. An invention in general must fulfill certain criteria in order to be protected by a patent. For example, the Patents Act, 1970 in S. 2(1) (j) defines invention as a new product or process involving an inventive step and capable of industrial application. In other words, an invention in order to be patentable must show an element of novelty, must show “an inventive step”, and must be of practical use. Particularly, the Patents Act, 1970 defines “inventive step” as a feature of an invention that involves technical advance as compared to the existing knowledge or having economic significance or both and that makes the invention not obvious to a person skilled in the art. In other words, patent rights are not available for new advances that are merely obvious extensions or modifications of prior designs. Besides, the requirement of difference over prior art, there is a requirement to establish the extent of common general knowledge that exists while

Therefore, protection of patents is one of the key conditions necessary for further development of the pharmaceutical industry. At the same time, non-efficient legislation that does not provide the necessary level of patent protection is one of the factors that hamper expansion of “Big Pharmaceutical” companies to the developing countries8.