[Infowarrior] - Economists: IP laws re killing innovation

[Richard Forno]

Economists Say Copyright and Patent Laws Are Killing Innovation;  
Hurting Economy

http://www.newswise.com/p/articles/view/549822/

Newswise — Abolishing patent and copyright law sounds radical, but two  
economists at Washington University in St. Louis say it's an idea  
whose time has come. Michele Boldrin and David K. Levine see  
innovation as a key to reviving the economy. They believe the current  
patent/copyright system discourages and prevents inventions from  
entering the marketplace. The two professors have published their  
views in a new book, Against Intellectual Monopoly, from Cambridge  
University Press.

"From a public policy view, we'd ideally like to eliminate patent and  
copyright laws altogether," says Levine, John H. Biggs Distinguished  
Professor of Economics. "There's plenty of protection for inventors  
and plenty of protection and opportunities to make money for creators.  
It's not that we see this as some sort of charitable act that people  
are going to invent and create things without earning money. Evidence  
shows very strongly there are lots of ways to make money without  
patents and copyright."

Levine and Boldrin point to students being sued for 'pirating' music  
on the internet and AIDS patients in Africa dying because they cannot  
afford expensive drugs produced by patent holders as examples of the  
failure of the current system. Boldrin, the Joseph Gibson Hoyt  
Distinguished Professor in Arts & Sciences and Chair of the economics  
department says, "Intellectual property is in fact an intellectual  
monopoly that hinders rather than helps the competitive free market  
regime that has delivered wealth and innovation to our doorsteps."

The authors argue that license fees, regulations and patents are now  
so misused that they drive up the cost of creation and slow down the  
rate of diffusion of new ideas. Levine explains, "Most patents are not  
acquired by innovators hoping to protect their innovations from  
competitors in order to get a short term edge over the rest of the  
market. Most patents are obtained by large corporations who have built  
portfolios of patents for defense purposes, to prevent other people  
from suing them over patent violations."

Boldrin and Levine promote a drastic reform of the patent system in  
their book. They propose the law should be restored to match the  
intent of the U.S. Constitution which states: Congress may "promote  
the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times  
to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective  
writing and discoveries."

They call on Congress to reverse the burden of the proof on patent  
seekers by granting patents only to those capable of proving that:

• their invention has social value

• a patent is not likely to block even more valuable innovations

• the innovation would not be cost-effective absent a patent

The authors acknowledge that such drastic reform is unlikely and  
outline an incremental approach for Congress to gradually reduce the  
scope of patents, regulation and licensing.

Nevertheless, their call for changing the system is urgent. The  
economists compare intellectual monopoly (patents) to medieval trade  
monopolies which were proven to be economically detrimental. They  
write, "For centuries, the cause of economic progress has identified  
with that of free trade. In the decades to come, sustaining economic  
progress will depend, more and more, on our ability to progressively  
reduce and eventually eliminate intellectual monopoly."

Professors Boldrin and Levine maintain a blog on this topic: www.Againstmonopoly.org 
.