It's especially interesting given that the U.S. model for IP is pragmatic rather than ideologic, i.e. temporary government-granted monopolies are a necessary evil we accept in order to further technological and creative progress for the benefit of all citizens.<p>Considering the opinion many here have that innovation in the U.S. is stifled rather than encouraged under the modern politicized IP model, it might be enlightening to compare how effective innovation is under each model.  I am curious how much sustained innovation is happening over there versus the highly-publicized accounts of IP 'theft'?