Bonum Certa Men Certa

Professor Lisa Larrimore Ouellette Questions Whether Patents Work When Patent Scope is Too Broad

Patent systems don't exist in a vacuum...

Lisa Larrimore Ouellette



Summary: Citing MIT economist (and MacArthur “genius”) Heidi Williams, Professor Lisa Larrimore Ouellette from Stanford challenges old myths and quotes: “we still have essentially no credible empirical evidence on the seemingly simple question of whether stronger patent rights—either longer patent terms or broader patent rights—encourage research investments.”

TODAY we intend to publish a lot of articles about the USPTO and some of these will be relatively long. As usual, we are going to focus on software patents. After that, for at least a fortnight, I'll be away on holiday and won't be able to cover much.



"In the case of software, for instance, pace of innovation is high, code can count as prior art, code can be modified, forked, reused etc. and there are many programming languages with copyright assigned to underlying implementations."Last week an article titled "Do Patents Work?" was published by Lisa Larrimore Ouellette, Assistant Professor of Law at Stanford. Our position is that patents work, but not when everything under the sun is patentable. One must not lose sight of the collaterals/externalities; Always check economic impact in said domains. In the case of software, for instance, pace of innovation is high, code can count as prior art, code can be modified, forked, reused etc. and there are many programming languages with copyright assigned to underlying implementations. There is thus not much evidence that patents on software "work" or are even needed in the first place.

Here is what this Yale Law School graduate wrote in her analysis, which focuses on pharmaceutical and chemical industries:

As everyone who has taken a patent law course knows, the reason we have patents is to increase private incentives for knowledge production. But do patents actually work? Based on her review of the existing evidence, MIT economist (and MacArthur “genius”) Heidi Williams isn’t sure; she concludes that “we still have essentially no credible empirical evidence on the seemingly simple question of whether stronger patent rights—either longer patent terms or broader patent rights—encourage research investments.”

This bottom line will not be a surprise to those who have followed the empirical literature, but Williams’s careful identification and modeling of the relevant empirical parameters and her discussion of the most relevant evidence on each point makes her review a must-read for anyone interested in patent policy.

[...]

On the second question, the ex ante incentive effect of stronger patent rights, there is again survey evidence, though it is useful primarily for indicating that the pharmaceutical and chemical industries value patent protection much more than other industries. To empirically estimate the relationship between patent strength and research investments, some researchers have looked at the impact of national patent law changes and found little effect. But one would expect such studies to understate patents’ impact: increasing protection in a small economy will not noticeably increase innovation in that economy if domestic firms were already innovating for the global market.

[...]

In the biomedical context, evidence from survey results and some clever instrumental variables studies of patent applications on human genes and patents invalidated in court have suggested that upstream patents have little effective (positive or negative) on the quantity of downstream innovation. But invalidation of patents in fields such as computing and electronics appears to increase the number of innovators subsequently citing that patent.

[...]

The bottom line is that despite the vast number of empirical patent studies—Williams notes the 3000 citations to a foundational patent-citation paper—very few studies have convincingly tackled the causal link between patent policy and research investments.


That point about "research investments" is often being exploited by pharmaceutical giants that 'invest' (funnel) massive profits not in research but instead give that money to shareholders. They just tell the public (and public officials) that those massive profits somehow "save lives", by latching onto the "R&D" mythology.

"They just tell the public (and public officials) that those massive profits somehow "save lives", by latching onto the "R&D" mythology."What we are seeing in the news this month is the ITC weaponising patents for embargo, e.g. of drugs that are about to save lives. See this news report which says "practitioners suggest that pharmaceutical companies are beginning to look to the International Trade Commission (ITC) as an appealing alternate venue for patent litigation."

People and firms go to the ITC when they want embargo (or injunction).

"Firms that stand to profit from the UPC are not credible when commenting on the prospects of the UPC."Injunctions, incidentally, are what makes the UPC very dangerous to Europe. The UPC is largely backed by pharmaceutical giants; this has long been known.

Barker Brettell LLP, already mentioned here in relation to the UPC earlier this year and last year, wrote another article about the UPC (actually promotional piece in its corporate Web site) and it is noted as saying: "Irrespective of Brexit, the unitary patent (UP) agreement may come into force by early next year" (not a statement that the general public agrees with). Firms that stand to profit from the UPC are not credible when commenting on the prospects of the UPC. They just try to attract business. We certainly hope that more people now understand that patent maximalism is quite a disease; believing that the more patents we grant the better off we will be is misguided, especially when more radical measures such as embargoes are introduced. Later today we are going to show examples of software patents utilised for software embargoes (impacting small companies in Europe).

Recent Techrights' Posts

Red Hat Offers DRM, TPM, and Backed Doored 'Confidential' Containers (CoCo) for Microsoft (Proprietary Spyware)
No kidding!
[Meme] Plagiarism Does Not Eliminate Jobs by Replacing Humans, It Replaces Human Knowledge With False Cruft
We need to boycott sites that fake their output
[Meme] Doing Dog's Job (Not God's Job)
The FSF did not advertise the talk by RMS (its founder), who spoke in France almost exactly 23 hours ago
[Meme] Free Software and Socially-Engineered Groupthink (to Serve Big Sponsors Like Google and Microsoft)
They do this to RMS all the time
 
Focusing on the Issues
we'll do our best to find the news and not talk about "Mr. T"
Only About 3.6% of Web Users in Pakistan Use Vista 11, According to statCounter
It's not hard to see why so far in 2025 Microsoft has already had several waves of mass layoffs - more than any other company
Rumour: In IBM, Impending "25% Reduction in Finance Roles"
25% to be laid off?
[Meme] Fake Articles From linuxsecurity.com (Just Googlebombing "Linux" With LLM Slop)
Google should really just entirely delist that site
RedHat.com Written by Microsoft Staff, Promoting Microsoft' Proprietary Software That Does Not Even Run on Linux!
This is RedHat.com this week...
Links 22/01/2025: Mass Layoffs at Stripe, Microsoft's Illegal Accounting Practices Under Scrutiny
Links for the day
Fake 'Article' by Brittany Day (Guardian Digital, Inc) About Linux Mint 22.1 'Xia'
Apparently they've convinced themselves that this is OK
Red Hat Dumps "Inclusive Language", Puts "Master" In Official Communications and Headlines
Red Hat: you CANNOT say "master" (because it is racist). Also Red Hat: we put in it our headlines.
Over at Tux Machines...
GNU/Linux news for the past day
IRC Proceedings: Tuesday, January 21, 2025
IRC logs for Tuesday, January 21, 2025
Gemini Links 21/01/2025: Media Provocations and Nazis Not Tolerated
Links for the day
Slopwatch: BetaNews Plagiarism and LLM Slop by UNIXMen
"state-of-the-art" plagiarism
What Fedora, OpenSUSE, and Debian Elections Teach Us About the State of Weak (or Fake) Communities
They show a total lack of trust in these communities
Links 21/01/2025: Mass Layoffs in "Security" at Microsoft (Despite Microsoft Promising It Would Improve After Many Megabreaches), Skype is Dead (Quietly)
Links for the day
Alternate Version of Daniel Pocock's 2024 Talk, "Technology in European Parliament Election Campaign"
There's loud ovation at the end of the talk
Gemini Links 21/01/2025: London Library, Kobo Sage, and Beyerdynamic DT 48 E
Links for the day
The January 20 Public Talk by Richard Stallman (Around Midday ET), Livestream 'Assassinated' by Google's YouTube
our guess is that the 'cancel mob' sabotaged it, possibly by making a lot of false reports to YouTube
[Video] Daniel Pocock's Public Talk About Free Software Politics, Social Engineering, Debian Deaths and Suicides, Coercion and Exploitation of Women
took many months to get
BetaNews Cannot Survive If Its Fake Articles Are Just SPAM for Companies Like AOHi and Aren't Even Composed by Humans
This is what domains or former "news" sites do when they die and look very desperately for "another way"
Pocock shot in the face, shot in the back, shot on Hitler's birthday saving France, Belgium and FOSDEM
Reprinted with permission from Daniel Pocock
Dr Richard Stallman in Montpellier, Robert Edward Ernest Pocock in France
Reprinted with permission from Daniel Pocock
Over at Tux Machines...
GNU/Linux news for the past day
IRC Proceedings: Monday, January 20, 2025
IRC logs for Monday, January 20, 2025
Links 20/01/2025: Conflict, Climate, and More
Links for the day
Gemini Links 20/01/2025: Conflicted Feelings and Politics
Links for the day
Daniel Pocock's ClueCon 2024 Presentation Was Also Streamed Live in YouTube and Later Removed by Google, Citing "Copyrights". Now It's Back.
The talk covers social control media, Debian, politics, and more
Google 'Cancels' RMS
Is the talk happening?
Microsoft Revisionism Debunked by Microsoft's Own Words About “the Failure of OS/2”
The Register on “the failure of OS/2”
Improving Daily Links by Culling Spam, Chaff, and LLM Slop
the Web is getting worse
Links 20/01/2025: Indonesia to Prevents Kids' Access to Social Control Media (Addiction and Worse), Climate News Catchuo
Links for the day
[Meme] EPO Targets
Targets mean nothing if or when you measure the wrong thing
EPO Union Says Monopoly-Granting Targets at EPO "Difficult to Achieve Without Compromising [Staff] Health, Personal Time or the Quality of the Final Products" (Products as in Monopolies, Not Real Products)
To those of us (over 99.999% of people impacted by this) who do not work at the EPO the misuse of words like "products" (monopolies are not products) should be disturbing
The EPO is Nowadays Trying to Trick Staff Into Settling Instead of Solving the Underlying Problems of Corruption and Injustice
This seems like a classic case of "divide-and-rule" or using misled/weak people to harm the whole group (or "the village")
Links 20/01/2025: More PR Stunts by ByteDance and MLK’s Legacy Disrespected
Links for the day
Gemini Links 20/01/2025: Magnetic Fields, NixOS, and Pleroma
Links for the day
BetaNews Spreads Donald Trump Propaganda, Promotes Scams, and Publishes Fake 'Articles' About "Linux"
This is typical BetaNews
Richard Stallman 'Unveils' His January 20 Talk in Montpellier, France
It's free (gratis)
Over at Tux Machines...
GNU/Linux news for the past day
IRC Proceedings: Sunday, January 19, 2025
IRC logs for Sunday, January 19, 2025