Survey: Is the patent system beneficial for your company or clients?

Patent holders make money from their patents in lots of different ways. They may, for instance, receive a check based on a licensing agreement or infringement damage awards; or raise prices after excluding competitors from their market niche.  Of course, those same companies will also spend money on patents — paying for prosecution and litigation of their own patents; licensing and litigating against other patents; and avoiding market opportunities because of competitor patents.

When you have a few moments, please complete the following survey on the microeconomics of patents:

======================================================

Where do you work:	Law Firm Large Corporation Small Corporation Government Educational Other
Major area of technology for your company / clients:	Biotechnology Electrical / Electronic Mechanical Software Other Chemical Pharmaceutical Other
How involved are you with your company / client's patents:	Highly involved Somewhat involved Not involved
Overall, has your company made money from the patent system?	Clearly positive (made money) Unsure whether positive or negative Clearly negative (lost money)
Please explain why your company/client made/lost money.
Email Address: (OPTIONAL)

free forms

Comments

[KCB]

This is a BS survey. Most clients can't see past 1 quarter. The patent system is important to the country. What is important to the country is important to the clients. This is usually from a strategic viewpoint, i.e., more than one quarter. Therefore most clients are incompetent to render an authoritative opinion in this regard. If a client's interest differs from that of the country . . . well then . . . I think different questions are in order that are separate and apart from intellectual property:)

[stepback]

I'll second KCB's sentiment that the survey is not well formed and asks the wrong questions.

The Preamble to the US Constitution says:

"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

The "general welfare" is promoted by encouraging inventors to come forward and disclose their various discoveries so that each of us may stand on the shoulders of giants, as Sir Isaac Newton was understood to have expressed it.

The notion of the patent "system" being good or "bad" for any one private entity is a bogus way of evaluating the American system in light of the purpose for which the Founding Fathers established it. How self-centered and blinded by greed can we get? Never mind. I don't want to know. (I'm afraid to know.)

[ip-esq]

I think the survey would be useful in some context. I would tweak the questions a little, but the gist is there. For example, I'm interested to see the differences based in industry (i.e. biotech v. software)

Also, I would like to take a survey where people are asked to define a patent troll. I'm confident there would be different definitions based on indusry.

[Joe Examiner]

I used to work for a small company (aviation area) for which our patents were very important to obtain funding. We only had a few, but we did benefit from them greatly.

[MaxDrei]

What's all this, StepBack, about "come forward and disclose". I take it then that the Founding Fathers would have been fans of First to File and of the CAFC Liebel-Flarsheim decision, rather than of First to Invent and Best Mode. Me too. I like the idea of standing on the shoulders of giants.

[CrocDundee]

I Love you Yanks - no laughing - I really do. And as for you stepback, I just want to give you a big Aussie hug - you big slice of apple pie. Is there anything sweeter than a proud American citing their constitution - hand on heart style. Brings a tear to my eye, can't imagine what effect it must have on those “founding fathers”. I especially like the way you talk about the evils of greed whilst citing a text containing the line "secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity".

But hypocrisy aside, it is healthy to review any system from time to time and remove the rose coloured glasses, as all systems evolve in good and bad ways - especially the patent system. So give it a go Mr negative – if you are happy with it – respond positively - if not - respond negatively. I thought you Yanks loved democracy – or at least I’m sure the “founding fathers” did!

[GSP jr]

You'd be surprised at how many people think that not only is the patent system destructive but also not needed to spur innovation at all (after all, "bifocals were invented without a patent system"). In my patent law class in law school, this was clearly the majority opinion and my brainless teacher was actually agreeing with it.

Obviously, I disagree completely.

[KCB]

Hey Crocdundee watch the insults will ya? Some of us are more use to being referred to as a reb than a yank:)