The Social Welfare of Patent Wars

This blog is in response to the presentation Efrat Kasznik in class regarding strategic patent property. 

Efrat's main takeaway during the class presentation was regarding how Intellectual property is a strategic asset to many companies, whether it be copyrights, trademarks, or patents. While I agree wholeheartedly with this, I feel she did not address the counter arguments often made when debating intellectual property law. 

During the presentation Mrs. Kasznik stated a interesting fact which I found particularly interesting, there are 250K patents that go into a smartphone. I find it hard to believe there are even 10K different parts that go into a smartphone, design or utility wise. And while it is of course possible I am mistaken, imagine perhaps if I am correct and the number of patents in a phone far outweigh the concepts. Imagine the difficulty our innovators find themselves in, trying to navigate around a field of technology overloaded with patents far beyond its carrying capacity. I personally would find this to be quite a turn-off for both invention and the mobile phone field. 

This at last brings me to my counter argument to the patent system. While yes a strong patent system does incentivize innovation, it can also be a deterrent when enforced too heavily. I would characterized this distinction as a strategic advantage, to overbearing suffocation; short term vs long term. A extremely stringent patent system would create short term incentives for the innovators, at the cost of long term advancements when future innovators are unable to navigate a industry, such as the mobile phone industry with 250K patents.

While I am not qualified to speak on the effectiveness of the current patent system, my main takeaway is a cautionary post to not blindly advocate for the strictest patent system possible. Too much of a good thing is too much of a good thing.