One way of finding promising technology developments is to analyze new patents. Researchers have found a way to measure the rate at which a technology is improving by analyzing relevant patent metrics. The results can be used to predict which technologies are most likely to succeed and provide a good investment opportunity.
Among the 28 domains analyzed by the study, the ones that are growing at the fastest pace included: optical and wireless communications, 3D printing, and MRI technology. Other domains showed slower rates of progress. Some of them were to be expected (e.g. combustion engines which already have a long history), but interestingly the technology destined to replace them - batteries (for electric cars) also seem to have a slow rate of progress.
To find out more about this topic, please read the following article:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/04/150415155329.htm
Source:
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0121635
Christopher L. Benson , Christopher L. Magee: "Quantitative Determination of Technological Improvement from Patent Data"
Questions:
1. Are you more inclined to believe that patents stifle or spur technological innovation?
2. Do you think it is a good idea to create a technology rating system based on patents? Will patent trolls find a way to abuse this method?
3. Should software patents be awarded? What safeguards or conditions would you propose for software patents?
4. Tesla Motors company, which is arguably at the forefront of battery technology innovation, decided to open up to competitors all the electric car related patents that made their product successful. Why do you think they did that? Was it a smart move? What effect could it have on the ranking from the study?
5. What should never be allowed to be patented?
1. Are you more inclined to believe that patents stifle or spur technological innovation?
ReplyDeleteWell patents have been often criticized in press and there is spread rumor that patents are slowing down production of innovative technology. There is example in computer market. Before IBM PC there was produced lot of different computer types like Apple, Amiga, Atari, Commodore, ZX Spectrum and lot of more. Open IBM PC revolutionized market so various producers could develop parts for this computer and few years latter PC became standard for personal computer. Echo of this strategy move where repeated in other PC technologies. Perhaps there is no need to increase speed of PC evolution now and other moves are required now.
2. Do you think it is a good idea to create a technology rating system based on patents? Will patent trolls find a way to abuse this method?
This tool could be warm welcomed by lot of people from financial and consulting sector. But is correlation of about 0.75 enough to invest many in technologies pointed by this method. Maybe someone with strong mathematical skill will answer this very interesting question.
3. Should software patents be awarded? What safeguards or conditions would you propose for software patents?
Software is very evolving product. Require lot of changes and lot of ideas to implement. So if we try patent every software innovation that could increase cost of software dramatically. And what about opensource movement?
4. Tesla Motors company, which is arguably at the forefront of battery technology innovation, decided to open up to competitors all the electric car related patents that made their product successful. Why do you think they did that? Was it a smart move? What effect could it have on the ranking from the study?
Partially answer for this question I gave in ad. 1.
5. What should never be allowed to be patented?
I have no idea. :)
Yes, that's true, the open architecture of the IBM compatible PC helped the hardware and software of early computers in many ways. Perhaps, as you've suggested, Tesla is trying to do the same for the infrastructure and standards needed to make electric cars viable?
Delete1. Are you more inclined to believe that patents stifle or spur technological innovation?
ReplyDeleteThat depends on how we define technological innovation. Patents surely force people to create alternatives of solutions that obtain same results or enable same functionality. However in most cases to achieve something new we build on top of something that already exists and if we can't use that then our potential is hindered.
2. Do you think it is a good idea to create a technology rating system based on patents? Will patent trolls find a way to abuse this method?
I have same thoughts as Piotr. I am not sure if the correlation of 0.74 is good enough.
3. Should software patents be awarded? What safeguards or conditions would you propose for software patents?
Patenting software is like patenting the English language. Imagine you couldn't freely use some phrase in your statement. Sounds preposterous, doesn't it?
4. Tesla Motors company, which is arguably at the forefront of battery technology innovation, decided to open up to competitors all the electric car related patents that made their product successful. Why do you think they did that? Was it a smart move? What effect could it have on the ranking from the study?
They most likely did that to attract people to create inventions on top of what already exists. This will accelerate technological breakthrough and greatly increase the quality and usability of components that would benefit from it, eventually leading to higher sales of electric cars.
5. What should never be allowed to be patented?
Things that are crucial and necessary to life. Breathing air, drinking water, you know the drill. ;)
"Patents surely force people to create alternatives of solutions that obtain same results or enable same functionality."
DeleteYou know, I never thought about it this way, but you're right. This can be viewed both as something negative and positive. Negative, because you're forced to reinvent the wheel (or pay the license fees...). But at the same time positive, because maybe you can do it better (and there's an extra incentive to try)?
1. Are you more inclined to believe that patents stifle or spur technological innovation?
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, I need to write that the law`s regulation concerning patents are extremely tangled. In my opinion the low in itself should regulate rights to the innovations so, the patent`s idea should have never been created. For me patents stifle technological innovation, as companies has a brainstorms wasting time and money how to do something very similar with functionalities but in the way which won`t touch rights covered by patents.
2. Do you think it is a good idea to create a technology rating system based on patents? Will patent trolls find a way to abuse this method?
I am far away from the idea. It is too multidimentional environment.
3. Should software patents be awarded? What safeguards or conditions would you propose for software patents?
First of all, I think that the patent`s idea should have never been invented. On the other hand having introduced patent`s system I take Michail`s point of view. Programming is like a foreign language, so let`s cover by patent`s regulation all the goods that have been created or invented by creatively usage of Polish language: like books, poems, etc.
4. Tesla Motors company, which is arguably at the forefront of battery technology innovation, decided to open up to competitors all the electric car related patents that made their product successful. Why do you think they did that? Was it a smart move? What effect could it have on the ranking from the study?
I don`t know the details of the idea so I am not going to take a line on the question. Generally, if Tesla decided to introduce such an idea, they must have the business plan how to make a money on it.
5. What should never be allowed to be patented?
As I stated, in my opinion the patent`s idea should have never been introduced. If I have to answer I agree with Michail that everything what is necessary for a living like water, air, etc. in their basic condition.
Judging by the numbers of lawyers employed by large companies to protect their patents, the laws covering patents are indeed quite tangled. But does that necessarily make the whole concept of patents redundant?
DeletePatents also force the inventor to release their idea to the public through the patent office instead of trying to keep it secret. Although, some inventors will chose to forgo patents for this reason, especially if their product is difficult to reproduce (like a chemical formula for example).
1. Are you more inclined to believe that patents stifle or spur technological innovation?
ReplyDeleteThere no easy answer to this question. They help protect great ideas, but they also can block healthy competition. Actually now that I think about it, I probably could imagine a world without patents and I don't think it would be worse. Companies would still compete either with quality or prices, and if you had an original idea, instead of trying to get a patent, you'd be trying to cash it as soon as possible.
2. Do you think it is a good idea to create a technology rating system based on patents? Will patent trolls find a way to abuse this method?
I think it's a good idea and I wouldn't worry too much about patent trolls in this context. They already know this environment very well and such system wouldn't help them as much, as it would help others.
3. Should software patents be awarded? What safeguards or conditions would you propose for software patents?
No, they shouldn't be awarded. I'm ok with hardware patents, but please stay away from software.
4. Tesla Motors company, which is arguably at the forefront of battery technology innovation, decided to open up to competitors all the electric car related patents that made their product successful. Why do you think they did that? Was it a smart move? What effect could it have on the ranking from the study?
Hopefuly they did it for the benefit of mankind (and maybe a bit for brand perception). I read that Toyota followed in their footsteps and released its fuel cell patents. I think it's very good for a brand, I prefer buying goods of companies which innovate and create new technologies and solutions, than companies which follow.
5. What should never be allowed to be patented?
Software and inventions crucial for the growth of humanity.
I guess can imagine a world without patents too - one flooded with Chinese knockoffs :) (well, maybe not that different from how it is today).
DeleteI agree that it's a good idea to support innovative companies for their efforts.
1. Are you more inclined to believe that patents stifle or spur technological innovation?
ReplyDelete>>I don't think so. Patents are to protect investments, not developments. There are some exceptions to this though I wouldn't prefer going into details.
2. Do you think it is a good idea to create a technology rating system based on patents? Will patent trolls find a way to abuse this method?
>>Mostly they will.
3. Should software patents be awarded? What safeguards or conditions would you propose for software patents?
>>I don't think such a thing is viable in general. It's like an author applying for a patent for his/her way of writing a book or a part of it.
4. Tesla Motors company, which is arguably at the forefront of battery technology innovation, decided to open up to competitors all the electric car related patents that made their product successful. Why do you think they did that? Was it a smart move? What effect could it have on the ranking from the study?
>>They want to turn their patents into money. 'You are free to develop a technology, once you are successful, you are obliged to pay them a cut'
5. What should never be allowed to be patented?
>> I can't think of a general subject fitting here.
"Patents are to protect investments, not developments."
DeleteThat's an interesting thought. I actually think Tesla might have done the opposite (that is, they have released the patents) to protect their investments. But there are different strategies for different purposes.
1. Are you more inclined to believe that patents stifle or spur technological innovation?
ReplyDeleteIt is said that patents are the basis of the knowledge-based economy, i.e. knowledge becomes an asset which can be sold and it has a certain price. Therefore patents in general are a commodity and depending on how well they answer the market needs, they influence the economical growth and innovation spur (the more attractive the innovation is the more companies want to make money on it, therefore there is a increase in the number of patents) or the contrary.
However it is important to acknowledge that there are different kinds of innovations - on the one hand there are are market and technology driven ones, on the other there are social innovations - innovations that create a common good, social values and intangible assets, usually not really economically feasible. Both categories can be referred to as technological. The latter depend however on knowledge that can be freely accessed by everybody in the society and therefore if patented - it would stifle the innovation creation process and economy as such.
2. Do you think it is a good idea to create a technology rating system based on patents? Will patent trolls find a way to abuse this method?
Such a rating system would have to go hand in hand with a more holistic view on the global development processes. When looking through the frame of Schumpeter's Waves of Innovations - using just the rating system we may be able to discover which technology is doing better on the market in a certain point of time, but we will not see how well it fits in the overall economical tendency and will it be equally highly ranked in 1,2, 5 or 10 years.
3. Should software patents be awarded? What safeguards or conditions would you propose for software patents?
There needs to be a balance between the return on investment for the company which develops the software and the openness of data, as mentioned above, to equally achieve economical and social benefits. The issue is obviously very difficult.
4. Tesla Motors company, which is arguably at the forefront of battery technology innovation, decided to open up to competitors all the electric car related patents that made their product successful. Why do you think they did that? Was it a smart move? What effect could it have on the ranking from the study?
I believe they had some strong economical incentives to do that move, however they are hard for me to asses without specific business knowledge. Certainly this strategy is profitable for the common good - more people in the world can have access to a better, cleaner technology. As for the effect on the ranking - again without more specific details I cannot answer that question.
5. What should never be allowed to be patented?
Knowledge that influence the creation of the common good.
"Social values", "the common good" bring a new perspective to this topic. I'm not sure these concepts are in the vocabulary of some of these patent-heavy companies (certainly not in the case of patent trolls!).
DeleteI guess they're not. After doing some research, I would like to add GENES to the list :)
Deletehttp://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/10/1013_051013_gene_patent.html