I work at a US government research agency and am in the process of applying for a couple of patents, so might be able to provide some insight.<p>We do not patent things to make money. The most profitable patent that my organization (NIST) has makes in the low six figures of royalties per year. If we started pulling in real money, I suspect congress would shut that down.<p>The stated mission of our tech transfer office (and the whole organization) is to make US businesses more successful and competitive. The unstated mission of researchers is to figure out interesting things and to get our ideas into practice. Fulfilling both of those missions, we might patent something for a few reasons:<p>- So that we can license it to US companies and not German or Chinese companies. Not unreasonable, considering the US taxpayers paid for the work.<p>- So that we can offer an exclusive license to one company in exchange for commercializing the invention. Many inventions require more investment to be commercially useful, and corporations are more likely to put up the money if they can&#x27;t get copied by a competitor.<p>- So that we can offer the invention royalty-free (or at least below market rates) to anyone who wants to use it. Sometimes this is easier and more reliable than trying to get the invention into the public domain via a journal publication.<p>- So that we can get the lawyers to do the writing for us instead of having to write a paper.