Patents are for losers

Erin Fahrenkopf
Jul 20, 2017 · 3 min read

Currently, I am all down on intellectual property rights (in the form of patents) and think that not only are they a drag on innovation, fairness, and the economy, but also, just what losers like. Let me explain.

Intellectual property rights are one form of property rights which gives the property owner legal protection. In the US, we have patents which give an inventor an option to legally protect his invention. If an inventor files and then is granted a patent, he owns the right to use the invention for a limited time just like you may a house (expect you own it for the indefinite future). The patent may deter others from using the invention but does not actually do anything unless the patent holder decides to protect his invention in court. Then the inventor can defend himself with the patent. I refer to inventors as “he”s because they are predominately men.

Why would the US support IP rights? The arguments in favor of patents contend that they are fair legal protection and productive for society because they spur innovative behavior. Potential inventors know that they will enjoy better benefits from their inventions because of the IP protections. And so they invent more. Additionally, patents require public disclosures of inventions so potential inventors can access the details on prior inventions. In contrast to a no patent world without incentive to disclose, inventors may keep their invention and/or its underpinnings secret and others would not benefit from that knowledge.

What about the arguments against IP rights? Basically, that the pro arguments are unimportant: a plethora of inventions will occur regardless and that the information captured in patent documents is pretty useless. Also, the extent society benefits from any invention is diminished by giving inventors the right to strict who can use their inventions.

Now, why am I all down on IP rights? First off, I think the value of an invention comes from moving on it and not coming up with it. Conception is a necessary step to then creating value but it is not the hard part. Also, I think that caring about IP rights seems like a loser’s game. Let me explain.

If your strategy is to protect your IP then you are not striving to gain from creating more value, but instead gain by minimizing the value others create. I am no inventor but I could take the analogous loser’s strategy and hate on H1B visas. I am a US citizen and want a job. I could strive to create more value by buffing up my skills and finding a way to best serve the needs of any potential employer, or instead, I could rely on protecting rights given to me as an American. I could advocate for my citizenship rights to minimize the job market competition. By doing this, I would rely on artificial protections to prop myself up and not try to add more value. I won’t be striving for my own competitive advantage but making the most of artificial protections. Winners create value comes from competitive advantage — effectively changing the world for better — and loser’s love artificial protections.


Originally published at ablifeing.blogspot.com.

)

Erin Fahrenkopf

Written by

Interests are statistics, data, the organization of work, evolution and using science practically.

Welcome to a place where words matter. On Medium, smart voices and original ideas take center stage - with no ads in sight. Watch
Follow all the topics you care about, and we’ll deliver the best stories for you to your homepage and inbox. Explore
Get unlimited access to the best stories on Medium — and support writers while you’re at it. Just $5/month. Upgrade