Correlation does not imply causation. A patent in a strong economy is worth more than a patent in a weak one, therefore it seems very likely they're pursued mo

Correlation does not imply causation. A patent in a strong economy is worth more than a patent in a weak one, therefore it seems very likely they're pursued more, and probably also more lobbied-for. It also seems very likely that the same invention will grow more quickly in a strong economy than a weak one. I certainly don't disagree that patents profit the inventor and attract investment, but to call that investment greater than the sum otherwise invested in competitors plainly denies that capitalism works. Here's a thought: keep patents, but force a public license for a reasonable fee. It's the withholding of patents that walls-off progress, not reasonable rent-seeking. So keep the money, keep the incentive, but lose the ability to prevent competition. On a moral note: do you really not think it twisted to punish somebody for building on the shoulders of who came before him? Is there anything more human than the ability to learn from and build on the work of your predecessors? I absolutely refuse to feel guilty for learning from what I see, and therefore to support the punishment of anybody else for it.