I agree that patents should be unique and novel (and that many patents are issued that are not novel). I disagree on the idea that innovation can only happen through expensive R&D and by experts in labs. Such innovation is useful and should be done and protected, but seems to be more evolutionary than revolutionary. Also, will companies take the time to do the R&D if they can't patent the idea and concept first?
Its important to protect more revolutionary ideas that may be developed by someone in a garage or starting a small company. Patents are supposed to also protect small businesses and individuals with great ideas that don't have the type of budgets you are talking about.
I think in practice it's exactly the opposite. Just look at Silicon Valley. Who is doing the really revolutionary stuff? Self driving cars are Google + the DOD. Space X has burned through about $1 billion in capital, with half of that coming from NASA. Tesla is burning $50-70m per quarter on R&D.
Small companies certainly invent new things, but even then there is usually a lot of money involved, from government contracts, university spin-offs, etc. The wireless tech company where I used to work started out in a basement, and has probably spent $10m+ over the last decade developing its technology (bootstrapped with DARPA contracts).
This is not to say that small-time inventors don't have revolutionary ideas. But in practice, the stuff that happens in a garage isn't inventive but rather application of well-understood technology.
Comments
I agree that patents should be unique and novel (and that many patents are issued that are not novel). I disagree on the idea that innovation can only happen through expensive R&D and by experts in labs. Such innovation is useful and should be done and protected, but seems to be more evolutionary than revolutionary. Also, will companies take the time to do the R&D if they can't patent the idea and concept first?
Its important to protect more revolutionary ideas that may be developed by someone in a garage or starting a small company. Patents are supposed to also protect small businesses and individuals with great ideas that don't have the type of budgets you are talking about.
I think in practice it's exactly the opposite. Just look at Silicon Valley. Who is doing the really revolutionary stuff? Self driving cars are Google + the DOD. Space X has burned through about $1 billion in capital, with half of that coming from NASA. Tesla is burning $50-70m per quarter on R&D.
Small companies certainly invent new things, but even then there is usually a lot of money involved, from government contracts, university spin-offs, etc. The wireless tech company where I used to work started out in a basement, and has probably spent $10m+ over the last decade developing its technology (bootstrapped with DARPA contracts).
This is not to say that small-time inventors don't have revolutionary ideas. But in practice, the stuff that happens in a garage isn't inventive but rather application of well-understood technology.