I keep hearing numbers of patents thrown out as a sign of success. “We have the best portfolio of patents in such and such field!” from a startup to boost their value or “We are the university with the largest number of patents granted last year!” from a university are typical social media posts. I firmly hold the unpopular belief that patents are mostly useless and I will use this post to defend my position.

First, getting and protecting a patent is expensive. I would much rather spend those resources in funding my own work instead of sustaining the patent offices. Between the US Patent Office , European Patent Office and the World Patent Office different fees incur in order to obtain and maintain patents. Based on the above lists, protecting your patented idea for 10 years costs roughly between 50k$ to 75k$ paid to the patent offices alone. Typically, a lawyer is necessary to guide you through the process which will cost extra on top of the above costs.

Second, let’s think about whether the benefits of the patent justifies the costs associated. Ultimately, a patent is supposed to protect! To quote the US PTO “What is granted is not the right to make, use, offer for sale, sell or import the invention, but the right to stop others from doing so” If you get and maintain a patent, you can be the only one making money from your invention. The US PTO also tells you what you need to do in case of an infringment: “you may initiate legal action. U.S. patents are effective only within the U.S. and its territories and possessions.”

So, ultimately, the patent office is really a notary public, testifying that you were the first to invent some technology in a given region as long as you pay to maintain. In the case of infringment, you have to notice and take legal action which are also expensive and uncertain.

I have never patented any idea and do not foresee doing so anytime soon. If I ever decide to commercialize something, I would much rather spend the money on developing the technology further instead of throwing it away on something that will accomplish nothing.

Below, I will share two anectodes from my career involving patents:

The EFM Incident: Academics from KU Leuven invented a nonlinear method that they named Electrochemical Frequency Modulation and patented it. Electric Power Research Institute(a non-profit) bought the patent and my former employer Gamry Instruments Inc. had exclusively licensed it from EPRI. For a while, Gamry paid the annual licensing fees. Then, a Dutch competitor also implemented EFM. They maintained that the patent wasn’t breached, we (Gamry) believed it was. When we contacted EPRI regarding this, EPRI did nothing saying it would cost them too much.

The Nameless Academic: Again, during my time at Gamry, an academic user contacted me asking for help. Shortly, he was looking to patent a cell design of his and his University administration asked for support from the industry before applying for a patent. In the discussions, it was clear that the academic only wanted the patent for publicity and another section in the resume. The University, trying to cut costs, only wanted to patent if absolutely necessary. They realized that to commercialize, a patent was not always necessary.

In the end, why do institutions brag about patents? Because they can. Getting a patent proves that you are the first to “invent” something and that is valuable. You can always claim this yourself as well but getting a patent office to certify this is more impressive. Personally, I think the money and the effort for a patent is much better directed elsewhere!

P.S I am aware that the pharmaceutical industry has a well established culture of patents. Since that is a field that I cannot be further away from, I am keeping that field out of this post.

April 15th, 2024