1. Skip to navigation
  2. Skip to content
  3. Skip to sidebar
Source link: http://archive.mises.org/7526/china-india-like-us-patent-reform/

China, India like US Patent Reform

December 10, 2007 by

The pending reform of US patent law that has “inventors” and the IP bar all upset (even though it only makes modest changes to the law) is welcome by India and China, at least. See, e.g., this Indian newspaper article arguing that the patent reform measures being considered by Congress will make it easier for India’s patent holders to enter the U.S. market, by giving “a new inexpensive option for Indian drug makers to attack the patents that give monopoly rights to top-selling MNC brands in the largest pharmaceutical market.”

There’s a similar piece in China, written by one of its leading intellectual property experts, Yongshun Cheng, former senior judge and deputy director of the Intellectual Property Division of the Beijing High People’s Court. In “The Greatest Changes of the U.S Patent System in the Last 50 Years”, published in China Intellectual Property News on November 7, 2007 (copy available here), Cheng argues that the proposed patent reform bill is bad news for American innovation and good news for foreign infringers, pointing out that the bill “is friendlier to the infringers than to the patentees in general as it will make the patent less reliable, easier to be challenged and cheaper to be infringed.” He writes:

“It is not bad news for developing countries which have fewer patents. Many of the Chinese companies are not patent owners in the U.S. market and their products are often excluded from the market because of patent infringement accusations. This bill will give the companies from developing countries more freedom and flexibility to challenge the relative U.S. patent for doing business in U.S. and make it less costly to infringe.”

Cheng concludes by claiming that the proposed bill is in conflict with the U.S. government’s practice of pressuring China to strengthen its own protection of intellectual property rights.

{ 7 comments }

Marc Pickett December 10, 2007 at 10:52 am

Not really surprising given the continued eviseration of everything of economic value in the USA. I assume this makes the ITC less formidable to foreign infringers?

Steven December 10, 2007 at 12:35 pm

No wonder tech is booming in Bangalore

Greg December 10, 2007 at 1:53 pm

Patent protection works when there is an arbiter to ensure their enforceability. When the U.S. is gradually losing its predominance in the global economy, it also loses its power to enforce its patent protection laws. This portends dire fate when MNCs shift their operations wholesale to China and India and the U.S. is left the empty shell of entertainment and software intellectual properties with their unenforceable copyrights and patents.

The solution is to rely less on patents and copyrights and put more effort at increasing access to higher education and decoupling the political process from special interest lobbies who have made patents and other regulatory frameworks unrealistic, unworkable and unenforceable. Time to come down from entitlement clouds back to earth.

lester December 10, 2007 at 4:19 pm

slightly OT a little copyright story- I work at a place that makes decorated cookies. if you want a cookie with a disney character you have to pay a dollar or so extra and there is a little copyright symbol on the back of the cookie. How disney collects the dollar I have no clue. My guess is the chinese bakeries don’t have this problem

mikey December 10, 2007 at 5:57 pm

From Schiff’s article:

“With the majority of our near 10 trillion dollar national debt financed with short-term paper, what happens when interest rates rise? Will the government extend the maturities of one-year treasury bills, tuning them into 10-year treasury bonds, forcing holders of government debt to accept below market returns for extended time periods?”

In addition to repos the FOMC also has the option
to make permanent purchases of T-notes.Interesting that the newest info on the size of this account was 6 years old(that I can find so far)It was 535 billion in 2001.
So rather than an obvious partial default, as outlined by Schiff above, wouldn’t the Fed be more tempted to increase the size of its permanent open market account with outright purchases? Very inflationary I know.But at this point I wouldn’t rule anything out.

mikey December 10, 2007 at 6:02 pm

Sorry the above was meant for a different thread.

leo January 15, 2011 at 12:59 am

China’s attitude towards intellectual property (they generally ignore it if possible) seems closer to your own ideal. Maybe they have somehting to teach the patent-hoarders of silicon valley.

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: