Comments on: President Obama Gives Reaganesque Innovation Speech http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2009/09/22/president-obama-gives-reaganesque-innovation-speech/id=6386/ Patents, Software Patents, Patent Applications & Patent Law Thu, 09 Feb 2012 07:58:49 +0000 hourly 1 By: American Cowboy http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2009/09/22/president-obama-gives-reaganesque-innovation-speech/id=6386/#comment-8292 American Cowboy Tue, 22 Sep 2009 20:11:17 +0000 http://www.ipwatchdog.com/?p=6386#comment-8292 Gene, it is worse that I thought. I just looked briefly at the administration's new paper "A STRATEGY FOR AMERICAN INNOVATION: DRIVING TOWARDS SUSTAINABLE GROWTH AND QUALITY JOBS" and it does not encourage reliance on patent rights. In the 26 page paper one bullet point is used on the PTO and it damns with faint praise: "The Administration is committed to ensuring that the United States Patent and Trademark Office has the resources, authority, and flexibility to administer the patent system effectively and issue high-quality patents on innovative intellectual property, while rejecting claims that do not merit patent protection." Instead the plan is to "spur innovation" with one subsidy, grant or tax gimmick after another. Let people own what they invent and then get out of the way. Gene, it is worse that I thought. I just looked briefly at the administration’s new paper “A STRATEGY FOR AMERICAN INNOVATION: DRIVING TOWARDS SUSTAINABLE GROWTH AND QUALITY JOBS” and it does not encourage reliance on patent rights. In the 26 page paper one bullet point is used on the PTO and it damns with faint praise: “The Administration is committed to ensuring that the United States Patent and Trademark Office has the resources, authority, and flexibility to administer the patent system effectively and issue high-quality patents on innovative intellectual property, while rejecting claims that do not merit patent
protection.”

Instead the plan is to “spur innovation” with one subsidy, grant or tax gimmick after another.

Let people own what they invent and then get out of the way.

]]> By: Gene Quinn http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2009/09/22/president-obama-gives-reaganesque-innovation-speech/id=6386/#comment-8288 Gene Quinn Tue, 22 Sep 2009 18:40:00 +0000 http://www.ipwatchdog.com/?p=6386#comment-8288 Cowboy- Amen! The only reason to have a little more optimism is because Kappos' language in important ways is mimicking Obama's language, and Kappos does get it. You are right though, political talk about innovation is cheap, and usually uninformed. Hopefully having someone like Kappos will make it different this time around. -Gene Cowboy-

Amen! The only reason to have a little more optimism is because Kappos’ language in important ways is mimicking Obama’s language, and Kappos does get it. You are right though, political talk about innovation is cheap, and usually uninformed. Hopefully having someone like Kappos will make it different this time around.

-Gene

]]> By: American Cowboy http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2009/09/22/president-obama-gives-reaganesque-innovation-speech/id=6386/#comment-8287 American Cowboy Tue, 22 Sep 2009 18:30:39 +0000 http://www.ipwatchdog.com/?p=6386#comment-8287 "I also note that President Obama only used the word “patent” once in his speech." And that was as an indirect reference to the success of aiding small businesses -- measure the success of a policy by how many patents it yields. The problem with that and with so much of big government innovation talk is that it takes the patent system for granted. i.e. if the policy is good, we know it is good because it yields a lot of patents. But, it ignores the critical role that the patent system itself plays in fostering innovation. “I also note that President Obama only used the word “patent” once in his speech.”

And that was as an indirect reference to the success of aiding small businesses — measure the success of a policy by how many patents it yields.

The problem with that and with so much of big government innovation talk is that it takes the patent system for granted. i.e. if the policy is good, we know it is good because it yields a lot of patents. But, it ignores the critical role that the patent system itself plays in fostering innovation.

]]>