Protecting patents.
Boland, Lois
In a recent article, ("Does One Size Fit All?: The
International Patent Regime," Summer 2004) Graham Dutfield
criticized international patent standard-setting efforts, contending
that developing countries should be free to design individualized patent
systems according to their respective levels of industrial and
technological development. Underlying this argument is the author's
view that patents hinder development and "imitation" is the
most effective way to bridge the industry-technology gap between
developing and developed countries.
Professor Dutfield's argument contradicts the underpinnings of
the patent system, as well as history. The 1948 Universal Declaration of
Human Rights expressly states that "[e]veryone has the right to the
protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any
scientific, literary, or artistic production of which he is the
author." For over 200 years, the US patent system has encouraged
inventors by rewarding their labors with exclusive rights for limited
times. As US President Abraham Lincoln, an inventor himself, once said,
"The patent system added the fuel of interest to the fire of
genius." Patents helped to transform the United States from a
largely agrarian society into an industrial power. Patent rights foster
innovation by permitting an inventor to attract the necessary capital to
bring the fruits of ingenuity to the marketplace. This translates into
new products, new jobs, and even the birth of new industries. The
economic reality is that there is little, if any, incentive to invest
capital in new technologies if competitors can simply "copy"
them immediately. Even Professor Dutfield admits that there is a direct
correlation between strong patent protection and foreign direct
investment, especially in certain industry sectors such as chemicals and
pharmaceuticals.
Moreover, the collective experience of many other countries
demonstrates that innovation and investment are fostered through a
strong and effective system of patent protection. Mexico, for instance,
is now the leading market in Latin America for pharmaceuticals, having
adopted strong patent protection through the North American Free Trade
Agreement. The Italian drug industry experienced unprecedented growth in
research activities following the government's decision to adopt
patent protection for pharmaceutical products. In addition, Korea and
Japan have also credited patent protection for the growth and strength
of domestic pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies. Yet another
example is Jordan, where the Central Bank of Jordan estimates that
pharmaceutical exports increased by 30 percent from 1999 to 2002 as a
result of Jordan's implementation of the Trade Related Aspects of
Intellectual Property Rights Agreement and the Jordan-US Free Trade
Agreement. Similarly, the conclusion of other recent free trade
agreements by the United States, such as those with Morocco and Bahrain,
are a testament to the importance of strong industrial property
protection.
Thus, contrary to Professor Dutfield's position that patents
hinder development, the evidence strongly suggests that the lack of
patent protection inhibits the growth of local industries by encouraging
imitation rather than innovation. The experiences of countries like
Mexico, Japan, Korea, Italy, and Jordan demonstrate that the adoption of
strong patent protection has stimulated greater investment in research
and development and has also strengthened their local industries.
Society as a whole is served by rewarding inventors for the fruits of
their intellectual labor.
Lois Boland is the Director of the Office of International
Relations of the United States Patent and Trademark Office
