Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

How Patent Trolls Destroy Innovation

Posted by Soulskill on from the i-had-an-idea-therefore-your-effort-is-mine dept.

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."

4 of 97 comments (clear)

  1. How the Patent System Destroys Innovation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:How the Patent System Destroys Innovation by lord_rob+the+only+on · · Score: 5, Insightful

      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).
       

  2. Re:Cry More by AC-x · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  3. who cares? by AndyKron · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.