Inventors who believe in open innovation should start applying for state patents instead of U.S. patents. Patenting at the state level prevents rivals from obtaining U.S. patents and generates valuable innovation spillovers in other states where the patent has no legal effect. It also creates a unique opportunity to force patent law reform from the bottom up. In exchange for filing fees, inventors can demand patents based on rules that support open innovation, like shorter terms in fast-moving industries, stricter disclosure requirements, or new restrictions on patenting by non-practicing entities. The lobbyists who stymie reform at the national level will have a much harder time blocking reform in all fifty states. Meanwhile, patent law’s dissenters need only one state to start granting patents in order to get courts, the media, and eventually Congress to pay attention.She has also published a longer article examining the history of state patents, and she has a forthcoming article arguing that states should resume granting patents to incentivize local innovation.
Patent & IP blog, discussing recent news & scholarship on patents, IP theory & innovation.
Saturday, May 4, 2013
Hrdy: State Patents
Posted by Lisa Larrimore Ouellette
Yale ISP fellow Camilla Hrdy has just posted Dissenting State Patent Regimes (IP Theory). Here is the abstract:
Posted at 6:41 AM Labels: federalism
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
Post a Comment