How Patent Trolls Destroy Innovation

walterbyrd sends this story from Vox: Everyone agrees that there's been an explosion of patent litigation in recent years, and that lawsuits from non-practicing entities (NPEs) — known to critics as patent trolls — are a major factor. But there's a big debate about whether trolls are creating a drag on innovation — and if so, how big the problem is. A new study (PDF) by researchers at Harvard and the University of Texas provides some insight on this question. Drawing from data on litigation, R&D spending, and patent citations, the researchers find that firms that are forced to pay NPEs (either because they lost a lawsuit or settled out of court) dramatically reduce R&D spending: losing firms spent $211 million less on R&D, on average, than firms that won a lawsuit against a troll. "After losing to NPEs, firms significantly reduce R&D spending — both projects inside the firm and acquiring innovative R&D outside the firm," the authors write. "Our evidence suggests that it really is the NPE litigation event that causes this decrease in innovation."

Comments

How the Patent System Destroys Innovation

[Anonymous Coward]

Fixed that for you.

"Patent trolls" is a propaganda term. It implies that there's a right and wrong way to own patents. In reality it's just that: Owning patents. Patents are a monopoly on ideas. That's the problem.

Re:How the Patent System Destroys Innovation

[lord_rob the only on]

Well yes and no, patent protects innovation because you have a monopoly on your idea. Then up to you to make other researches on new products with the money gained.
But if you use a patent, you're forced to reveal your idea and prepare your competitor to use it later. You're never forced to patent your idea tho (see Coca-Cola, never patented, receipt never given).
 

Re:How the Patent System Destroys Innovation

[fey000]

Extra! Extra! This just in! New research proves that patent "trolls" actively reduce wasted "R&D" attempts by sad deluded companies aiming to reinvent by themselves and worsen already existing ideas! WIPO economic policies vindicated! Simplification within reach! Coming soon: the Golden Age of the One, Single And Perfect Idea Of Everything (a.k.a. "the Wheel") ! Thanks "trolls", your country owes you a debt of gratitude!

Dear Mr. martin-boundary,
I am writing to notify you that I currently own patent #2139986924, entitled "Process through which a human being may communicate a non-specified message of arbitrary weight and importance to one or more other human beings without the distinct personal application of auditory signals and cues". It is clear through your most recent activity that you have applied this process without my express written consent. You are thus legally beholden to the patent owner, and unless you reimburse me a sum of €12,000 I will be forced to recoup the losses I have unjustly suffered from your piracy to the fullest extent permitted by US law. You have 45 minutes to comply.

Thank you for your cooperation
Mr Troll, Esq.

PS. Perhaps you shouldn't try to reinvent the wheel.

Re:How the Patent System Destroys Innovation

[StormReaver]

You can only patent an idea that's not obvious and novel....

That's how it should be, but it's not what has actually been happening for the last few decades. The patent office has been spewing out patent approval for the most obvious and commonly used ideas at a rate unparalleled in modern history.

And Congress and the Courts have been complicit in making patent defense so expensive that only the richest companies and individuals can even consider mounting a defense. They have also tilted the courtroom so far in favor of the trivially obvious patent troll that everyone else must simply cave in to the patent offensive, even when the patent wouldn't have a chance in Hell of being upheld in court.

Re:How the Patent System Destroys Innovation

[organgtool]

Well yes and no, patent protects innovation because you have a monopoly on your idea.

While I agree with most of what you have said, I have to make a pedantic statement about a common mistake that you have made that infuriates me - you can not patent an idea! You may patent an implementation of an idea, otherwise known as an invention, but you are not supposed to be able to patent the underlying idea.

You're never forced to patent your idea tho (see Coca-Cola, never patented, receipt never given).

This is true, although you've used a bad example since recipes are not eligible to be patented. But otherwise, you are correct - unpatented ideas can be protected as trade secrets.

Re:Cry More

[AC-x]

Patents are supposed to protect specific implementations, not vague ideas. If I patent a widget making machine, someone else can build a different machine that makes widgets in a different way and that's fine. Software patents are the equivalent of patenting the idea of a machine that makes widgets.

Re:Patents are a problem

[ThePromenader]

Hm, I don't quite agree. I think a 'use it or lose it' condition on patent claims would be both protective and productive. Oh, and I'd like to see that ideal applied to cybersquatters and their ilk, too.

who cares?

[AndyKron]

Why should I start a business when at any time a troll could come by with some vague patent, and sue me? Fuck this country, and fuck the government.

Re:who cares?

[organgtool]

It's even worse than that. Some companies don't even want to sell their products in the U.S. out of fear of patent litigation. I had a feeling this would eventually happen, but I didn't think it would happen this soon. The U.S. is losing ground in the tech sector and the worst part is that it's our own fault.