system reflect its mission to encourage invention and diffusion of technology; – and its costs reflect its modus operandi, which is to restrict the use of inventions.” The justification acknowledges the centrality of the patentability requirements and the potential value of disclosure in achieving the anticipated economic benefits of the system. Under this model, patents are argued to encourage and facilitate innovation. This is based on two main assumptions: 1) the grant of exclusive patent rights provides an incentive for socially and economically desirable levels of invention and innovation; and 2) the system requires disclosure of information and knowledge on which innovators may build which may otherwise be kept secret. More explicitly, the rationale details that in order to achieve economic growth, the patent system is required to incentivise innovation and knowledge transfer through the grant of monopoly rights. In this way, patents can be viewed as a form of social contract: society grants inventors exclusive rights over their inventions in return for disclosure of information on which other innovators may build. Guellec and van Pottelsberghe, two former chief economists of the EPO, consider the patent system from such an economic perspective: the aim of the patent system is “… economic in nature: it is to foster innovation and growth”. This growth is facilitated by disclosure through the patent system: is one aim of the patent system to make disclosure a preferred option to the “It inventor. Disclosure facilitates follow up inventions As Werner von Siemens, … a vocal advocate of patents in the late nineteenth century, once said: by ‘Because patenting each new thought is carried into the world; one hundred minds may take it up, may steer it to completely different paths and make good use of it’” … The major source of new technology is new knowledge, relating to science, technology, business or other Technical change is accelerated, and less costly, … when researchers have access to more knowledge, to more ideas that they could combine, recombine and test.” In this way, disclosure is claimed to improve the speed and efficiency of invention in society is central to economic growth”. “which contract’ and the patent system ‘Social Within the modern consequentialist justification, patents can be construed as a form of contract’ in which a patent is offered in return for public disclosure of an ‘social innovation. Society forgoes potential loss through the exclusionary rights provided
system reflect its mission – to encourage invention and diffusion of technology; and its costs reflect its modus operandi, which is to restrict the use of inventions.” The justification acknowledges the centrality of the patentability requirements and the potential value of disclosure in achieving the anticipated economic benefits of the system. Under this model, patents are argued to encourage and facilitate innovation. This is based on two main assumptions: 1) the grant of exclusive patent rights provides an incentive for socially and economically desirable levels of invention and innovation; and 2) the system requires disclosure of information and knowledge on which innovators may build which may otherwise be kept secret. More explicitly, the rationale details that in order to achieve economic growth, the patent system is required to incentivise innovation and knowledge transfer through the grant of monopoly rights. In this way, patents can be viewed as a form of social contract: society grants inventors exclusive rights over their inventions in return for disclosure of information on which other innovators may build. Guellec and van Pottelsberghe, two former chief economists of the EPO, consider the patent system from such an economic perspective: “… the aim of the patent system is economic in nature: it is to foster innovation and growth”. This growth is facilitated by disclosure through the patent system: “It is one aim of the patent system to make disclosure a preferred option to the inventor. Disclosure facilitates follow up inventions … As Werner von Siemens, a vocal advocate of patents in the late nineteenth century, once said: ‘Because by patenting each new thought is carried into the world; one hundred minds may take it up, may steer it to completely different paths and make good use of it’” … The major source of new technology is new knowledge, relating to science, technology, business or other … Technical change is accelerated, and less costly, when researchers have access to more knowledge, to more ideas that they could combine, recombine and test.” In this way, disclosure is claimed to improve the speed and efficiency of invention in society “which is central to economic growth”. ‘Social contract’ and the patent system Within the modern consequentialist justification, patents can be construed as a form of ‘social contract’ in which a patent is offered in return for public disclosure of an innovation. Society forgoes potential loss through the exclusionary rights provided
Anna%20Hescott%20Thesis.docx