[Rick’s Picks once again goes off the beaten path with a guest commentary on patents from forum regular Ben Rositas. For reasons that he makes clear, patents and free markets go hand in hand. Moreover, to the extent tariffs support this, they are justified. RA] Today I hope to illustrate -- by explaining what they are not-- why patents allow free markets to exist at all. Consequently, the link between patent and tariff will be revealed, in turn revealing the inextricable link among patent, tariff, and free market. I will begin with two interpretations of the U.S. Constitution, Article I , section 8, cls 8. Brackets denote separations that aren't readily apparent. "To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing [for limited times] to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries." Here, exclusive right belongs to someone, thus granting monopoly for the patent duration. And since it doesn't say "for a limited time," it is infinitely renewable. Conflicting with founding and framing principles, that interpretation is surely invalid. But if the brackets are expanded to include "to authors and inventors" the innovators are instead given limited, renewable durations, while exclusive right is secured to the patented thing. In the broader context of Article I, section eight -- Congressional powers in foreign/domestic matters -- the exclusive right is in the domestic market (otherwise it contradicts founding principles). Taken this way, competitive economic freedom is neither hindered nor obliterated. Free People Want Patents Exclusive right by patent means that foreign copies are infringement via smuggling. Ideas can be traded, explored, modified, reproduced, and patented, even if these are already done in multiple countries. And since domestic copies aren't infringement, nor domestic competitors barred from discovering or importing new ideas, improvement is actually encouraged. Copies
LATEST TRADES
