Patents Have Got to Go

It is about time someone told the truth; patents need to go.  The technology life cycle has reached a point where patents do more to stifle innovation than they do to encourage it.  We must abolish patents on technology products and software.  Nearly every study has show that patents do nothing to encourage innovation at all.  If companies are concerned with people steaing ideas, we already have non-disclosure agreements for that purpose.  Why isn't the Coke formula patented?  Because to do so would actually reveal the formula to the world.  An innovator that wants to really protect their invention is better off keeping it secret.

Most of the arguments for patents are based on the story of a lonely inventor that innovates, gets a patent on their invention, and that grants them protection against big businesses that want to steal their idea.  That is the fairy tale we are sold since childhood when we look at inventors like Thomas Edison.

The modern reality is far more cynical.  Often times a small innovator will be approached by a large business.  This large business will offer a contract to cross license the proprietors invention at a discount.  The inventor is then coerced to cross license under threat from the large companies patent portfolio and well funded legal team.

The current situation with Apple computer is strongly indicative of the rampant abuse of the patent system.  Many of the things that are patented aren't even true innovations to say the least.  One of the troubles with having a patent system is the determination of whether a particular invention is novel.  Instead of allowing clerks in a patent office that have no familiarity with the particular art being patented to determine whether inventions are novel, why not let the marketplace decide that.

Following the trends of the products in question in the Apple patent lawsuit against Samsung, one can clearly see who the true innovators are.  Samsung had a much larger variety of products and it was evident they were not infringing on any innovations.  However, the patent court ruled in favor of Apple.  This was highly disappointing, because it was a victory for patent trolls and non-innovators.  The courts acting this way, simply encourages this kind of patent troll behaviour, without true innovation.

Indeed, many large companies just buy patents and sit on them without innovating.  This is a complete abuse of the patent system.  Obviously the intent of patents was not for large companies to hold them hostage in portfolios without actually innovating.  Failing a complete abolishing of the patent system, I would settle for putting a requirement that granted patents be actualized within a certain time period.  After expiry of that period, the patent is auctioned off to the highest bidder by the patent office.  The process is repeated until someone innovates, and that patent is put into fully active status at that point.  If we are going to have a patent system, at least there should be no one owning a patent that is not building a product with it.