In the original article on the patent-framework I summarized a few points that provided a basis to conclude (1) the current patent-framework is flawed, (2) put forward two preconditions that policy-revisions must meet, (3) defined a proposal to change the patent-framework, and (4) briefly explained why such a change will stimulate progress.
Most people consider patents to have emerged as a means to stimulate inventions. However, this is not the case. Originally, patents have emerged in a two-fold manner. Patents emerged as a reward for providing products or services that were thought of as strategically important (to the kingdom), not necessarily new. Beside, patents (in Italy and England, but also as guilds in the Netherlands) emerged as a means to limit competition and favor some people. This was nothing different, and still is not any different, than a pure form of state-initiated discrimination.
Patents eventually were set – for a period of time, nowadays 20 years – to accommodate inventors to profit from their inventions exclusively. The element of new (to the marketplace, or more practically, new to the patent registry) was added. But, the element of exclusivity remained institutionalized. Continue reading “Part II – Arguing the Patent-Framework”
Financial innovations have been at the heart of the current economic mess. For any economist who is educated and specialized in the domain of economic renewal and innovativeness, it must have been a distinctively uncomfortable experience to hear the word innovation so many times in the context of financial products.
All these bankers and their financial liaisons who commonly use this word, only do so because it seems to sound about right. Too many times this simple word is used in an elaborate story in which it is falsely claimed they were unaware of the substantial risks they took creating these so-called financial innovations.
Did they really think that risks could be innovated non-existent? In this age of financial wizardry, such an explanation must be considered a harbinger of blatant ignorance and intellectual incompetence.
Continue reading “Great Depression 2.0 – Now, That Is An Innovation!”
Among the many economic problems of today one important issue has been receiving lesser attention. Of course the credit-crisis is more appealing and necessitating serious attention because of its detrimental impact it has and potentially will have for the world economy in the coming months and years.
However, this article focuses on another major issue: the international patent framework. This article sets out a necessary policy revision, which ultimately provides necessary economic incentives in case of a financial meltdown.
One pervasive misconception on market capitalism is that our economies are driven by free markets. Despite a couple of centuries of economic science and theory, free markets have still not been established. The capitalist markets of today are not synonymous with free markets. The globalization of market capitalism of today is more synonymous with oligopolistic markets and at times even with monopolistic markets. If capitalism can be saved its cure is found with laws and regulations that aim for free markets to emerge. One of these policy revisions enabling this goal, concerns an adjustment in our patent-framework.
Continue reading “Capitalism, Free Markets and Patents: Grounds For A Major Policy Revision”