Skep - How do patents "stifle innovation"? I've heard this assertion many times but not sure I understand the basis. A patent excludes others from making, using or selling what is claimed. Unless the patent covers a tool or process required to innovation (e.g. a microscope) or you need to built it to improve (rare, but even here not likely to be found liable or sued if solely to improve), its unclear how any patent can prevent anyone from further innovating. You are free, and in fact encouraged, to look at a patent and think of ways to improve what's claimed in the patent ("I think that invention is interesting, but if also do x, y and z it will be even better"). In fact, patentees are required to describe their invention to enable others to make it and also disclose the "best mode" of the invention (sometimes something to consider when deciding between patent and trade secret protection). In fact, under our current system, your application will be published even if you never get a patent.

In short, I understand how patents stifle commercialization of technology and how invalid patents can damage any economy, but not sure how they stifle innovation since you are always free to further invent.

Matthew - I'm not sure I understand your position. If mp3 is basically obsolete, then the patents to mp3 technology are not relevant.

On the other hand, if the mp3 patents cover not only the original commercialized technology, but also are broad enough to cover the improvement mp3 technology, then it appears the original patented idea still has a useful life since idea is still being used.

Regarding software patents, I don't think the PTO was adequately funded (Congress would siphon its fees) or trained to examine such applications initially resulting in many invalid patents being granted. They are better equipped now. I agree broad, invalid patents are problematic, but not sure applies to all patents, even software patents.

Now, we have Congress, the Courts and the PTO all independently making changes that will make it more difficult and more expensive to obtain and commercialize a patent. I agree some reforms were necessary, but concerned we may be watering down patent rights too much.

I found this article very interesting. My father was diagnosed with Alzheimers this past summer, but some in the family believe its frontotemporal dementia. His decline this past year has been more rapid then expected appearing much too fast for Alzhiemers. He speaks a lot about "projects" whether its writing a novel or executing a "million dollar" business transaction. This article make me wonder whether we should encourage these efforts. Thanks for the post.