Patent Trolls

Although the need to protect R & D investment is recognized, there appears to be a need to modernize the laws around intellectual property. What if the original patent owner is unable to continue development in a timely fashion, or chooses to withhold development of a product? Should the patent remain with the owner for the full amount of time if they are unable or choose not to produce an item that has a significant potential to improve lives, public safety or advance technology? What about

Proponents of patent reform largely focus on the cost of patent infringement litigation to the U.S. economy and companies. While some argue that the type of patents issued should be limited in order to uphold the intent of Article I, Section 8, others claim that standards for issuing patents should be strengthened in order to reduce the number of costly patent infringement lawsuits. The cost of litigation and standards for issuing a patent is the focus of the proceeding text and justification for patent reform in the United States.

An effective system of intellectual property is important in facilitating innovation as well as economic growth within a country and across all its borders (Davidson, Monoti, Wiseman, 2012). The current global economy is concentrating more in the invention of ideas that are original, other than in manufacturing of machines. To enhance and protect these ideas, there ought to be effective intellectual property laws. The government of Australia has prioritized the protection of original ideas from individuals through copyright, patent, and trademarks among other intelligent property laws, which give the inventor a temporary period to enjoy the financial benefits of his or her original idea. The major purposes of intellectual property laws can be contested; therefore, they create areas of interest for

From a rule utilitarian point of view, from a macroeconomic perspective, granting software patents by giving the exclusive right to sell, use,

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 Act brands anyone who “actively induces infringement of a patent” as an infringer, 35 U.S.C. 271(b) and imposes liability on individuals labeled “contributory” infringers 271(c).

“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

The American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPILA) (http://www.aipla.org/learningcenter/library/books/econsurvey/Pages/default.aspx) estimates that the average cost of defending a patent infringement case is $650,000 for lawsuits of $1 million or less and $2.5 million for those of $1 to $25 million. Because patent trolls know that many small companies lack these kinds of dollars for a fight over intellectual property, they often ask for relatively small sums of money – in the tens of thousands of dollars. The difference between the trolls’ demand for compensation and the cost of defending an infringement charge gives small business owners a strong incentive to pay up rather than

What is a patent bet? You might have heard people referring Patent Bets in horse racing and football betting. Are you wondering what this is? A Patent bet is also known as Full Coverage Multiple Bet since it offers a complete coverage of all possible combinations of bets from three selections. The patent consists of the three market selections bundled up together into one package with a potential of getting a very big returns once you land the three winning selections. Note that some Full Cover Bets exclude singles. Patent Bet resulted from an upgrade of Trixie Bet (A full cover bet) which consists of three selections but leaves out the single selections.

Are America patents greatly more beneficial or detrimental to innovation and trade in the economy? Arguable both stances are accurate. Innovation and trade in the national economy is based off the premise of the protection of ones inventions in the form of patents. Without this guarantee innovation would not be valued, only piracy trade would occur stagnating economic progress. On the global economic stance patents are becoming difficult to manipulate in trade deals like the highly controversial Trans-Pacific Partnership underway currently. Deals as such are becoming greatly more complicated as American politicians begin to manipulate foreign trade agreements trying to get the deal which benefit American markets and cooperations the best. This has become so difficult countries like China have opted out all together in the mass trade deals because their economic structure is built upon ripping off innovations from mostly American cooperations for a means of economic growth. This is where it is believe patents have to be saved to stop other countries impediments on fair trade but; then one could arguably say the complete opposite position, that patents all together are detrimental to innovation and trade in the economy because having them in itself is an impediment to free and fair trade alike. That idea all together is not practical and would be imprudent in term because it would disrupt the already established and paid for order.

Patents are a particular type of institution that is designed to protect an individual’s intellectual property rights. Britain’s patent system was established in 1624 and rose steeply in the mid-1750s which is around the time that the Industrial Revolution commenced (Moykr, 2009, p. 349). The significance that patents exercised during the Industrial Revolution was influenced by the political events that were occurring during this time. The political events increased the importance of intellectual property rights (Mokyr, 2009, p.349). Therefore, during the Industrial Revolution, there was an increase in the desire to protect the inventions or ideas of individuals. However, some inventors have expressed different opinions of the patent system

Imagine a world where ideas and inventions are stolen off each other with no legal consequences. Imagine a world where Samsung wasn’t sued by Apple because legally, there is no penalty for stealing designs. Imagine a world where Alexander Graham Bell or Thomas Edison wasn’t famous for their inventions because someone else had stolen their ideas and created the inventions publicly first. This is what the world would have been like without the use of patents. Patents ensure that no idea is stolen, sold, or replicated without the appropriate permission. Every inventor has ad their fair share of troubling experiences with patents. However, an inventor that did not allow his dilemmas with patents stop him from achieving great things is Thomas Edison. Due to the patent process, Edison was able to succeed at a young age, own numerous inventions, competed other inventors’ patents, and inspired others to compete with his inventions to further improve technology.

Every engineer strives to achieve a certain goal throughout their career. Some focus on becoming successful both in their job and in their lives, while others work to build a better world. Some engineers might have different goals, yet each engineer reaches certain milestones throughout their career that have a worthy value. Creating a patent, is by far one of the most prestigious achievements an engineer, inventor, or anyone acquire in their lifetime. Being able to brainstorm and formulate a specific item or article no other has thought of is truly something that most can only dream of. Yet what does making a patent really consist of, apart from bragging rights and maybe self-satisfaction? Patents serve as potential money-making ideas that can increase in value over time. Some patents can be worth millions while others have less worth than your pocket change. Regardless of the exact amount a patent can be worth, they still hold value which could potentially increase over time, making it a worthy investment. Next, having a patent hung up in one’s office or stated in a resume or CV is truly an eye-catching achievement that is highly regarded. It represents one’s creative and innovative abilities which can be very much needed when applying for a job or a certain position within a company. Finally, patents allow one to sell, use or make an invention with under legal protection from the country they live in. The key word there is invention, which is an idea or creation that can

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.

From the patent owner’s perspective, opposition proceedings enhance confidence in the issued patent; the patent is less likely to be attacked after six months from issuance since the cost to request trial for invalidation is higher and only interested parties may file.