Professional Documents
Culture Documents
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Wiley-Blackwell, The London School of Economics and Political Science, The Suntory and Toyota
International Centres for Economics and Related Disciplines are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize,
preserve and extend access to Economica.
http://www.jstor.org
[FEBRUARY
The EconomicTheoryConcerning
PatentsforInventions1
By ARNOLD PLANT
in theUniversity
(ErnestCassel Professor
ofCommerce
ofLondon)
for inventions comprise a special form of
I. PATENTS
property,createdby statutelaw. In the United Kingdom,for
instance,patents " sealed with the seal of the Patent Office
[which] shall have the same effectas if it were sealed withthe
Great Seal of the United Kingdom, and shall have effect
throughoutthe United Kingdom and the Isle of Man " are
to I932,
30
I934]
ECONOMIC
THEORY
CONCERNING
PATENTS
3I
ofownership
ofthesuppliesof a parsufficient
concentration
alternatives
for
ticulargood,and ofall theeasilysubstitutable
it,to enabletheownersto controlthe pricesof theproperty
nor the disposalof the
theyown. Neitherthe withholding,
property
of any one ownerwill in generalaffectappreciably
in question. Hitherto,thisinthe priceof the commodity
ownersto controlpriceshas beengenerally
abilityofproperty
approved.If we exceptrecenttendenciestowards" planned
withproperty
rights
mostproposalsto interfere
monopolies,"
theconcentration
of
havebeenaimedin thepastat prohibiting
undera singleownership,
commodities
suppliesof particular
ownersfromraisingtheprice
in orderto preventtheproperty
bywithholding
partof thesupply.
of propertyrightsin patents(and
3. It is a peculiarity
copyrights)
thattheydo not ariseout of the scarcityof the
Theyarenota consequence
objectswhichbecomeappropriated.
of scarcity.They are the deliberatecreationof statutelaw;
of privateproperty
and, whereasin generalthe institution
of scarcegoods, tending(as we
makesforthe preservation
looselysay)to lead us " to makethemostof
mightsomewhat
makepossible
rightsin patentsand copyright
them,"property
of a scarcityof the productsappropriated
which
the creation
be maintained.Whereaswe mightexpect
couldnototherwise
wouldnormally
thatpublicactionconcerning
privateproperty
of theraisingof prices,in these
be directedat theprevention
cases the objectof the legislationis to conferthe powerof
raisingpricesby enablingthecreationof scarcity.The beneis madetheowneroftheentiresupplyofa productfor
ficiary
whichtheremaybe no easilyobtainablesubstitute.It is the
thathe shallbe placedin a position
intention
ofthelegislators
to securean incomefromthemonopolyconferred
upon him
thesupplyin ordertoraisetheprice.
byrestricting
creatingthesepatent
4. It maybe assumedthatthestatutes
and copyright
monopolieswould not have been placed, or
allowedto remain,upon thestatutebooksin theabsenceofa
of publicadvantagefromtheiroperawidespreadexpectation
tion. Economistshave of recentyearsfoundnew difficulties
of the
of monopolyuponthemagnitude
in statingtheeffects
stillbroadlyaccepted
nationalincome,but it is nevertheless
ofthe
conditions
tendto promotethediversion
thatmonopoly
froma moreto a less generally
scarcemeansof production
to reviewthe
therefore,
utilisation.It is of interest,
preferred
of thosewho approveof the patentsystem,to
expectations
32
ECONOMICA
[FEBRUARY
and theextent
ofthoseexpectations,
considertheimplications
expectations
Are
those
been
realised.
they
have
to which
have been
devices
which
?
Are
the
in
themselves
reasonable
their
opera?
Has
appropriate
adoptedfortheirrealisation
may
not
which
consequences
in
objectionable
tion resulted
havebeenforeseen
?
5. As we have seen,thepurposeof patentsforinventions
periodover
is, bygivingan inventor
thecontrolfora definite
tomakeiteasierforhimtoderive
thedisposalofhisinvention,
an incomefromit. Withwhatobjects? As soonas we enter
of motive,we are, of course,venturing
intoan examination
I
and
debatable
ground.It will,nevertheless,
uponuncertain
aimis toencourage
agreedthattheultimate
think,be generally
and hope of
the expectation
inventing.This is undoubtedly
advocatesofpatents.The aim
thevastmajority
ofdisinterested
themselves
or not,is to
of all advocates,whetherinventors
makeinventing
paybetter,and thoseat anyratewhoare not
as a consequence.Even
inventors
hope formoreinventions
of the patentsystemwho would describe
thosesupporters
wouldprobably
theirargument
as purelyethicalin character
qua invenagreethattheirultimateconcernis thatinventors,
mayarguethattheir
tors,shouldbe enabledto survive.Theyare notrobbed
concernis to see thatproducersof inventions
ofthatwhichoughttobe,evenifitmaynotbe in commonlaw,
in inventors
is verylikely
theirproperty;andyettheirinterest
beliefthatinventions
are
derivedfroma morefundamental
and utilisathattheproduction
especiallygood in themselves,
to be encouraged,
and that
ought,therefore,
tionofinventions
theway to attainthatend is to extendthe sphereof private
of" inventing,"
and
so as to increasetheprofitability
property
as comparedwith other
of inventions,
of the exploitation
the
to attribute
therefore,
occupations.We aresurelyentitled,
invention.
existence
ofthepatentlawtoa desiretostimulate
of thepatentsystemon
6. In orderto examinetheeffects
necessaryfirstof all to ask what
inventionit is, therefore,
thattakesplace,and we
theamountof invention
determines
of " invention."To give
muststartwitha workingdefinition
ita wideenoughmeaning-muchmorecomprehensive,
bythe
way,thanthatto whichpatentlaw has cometo be appliedis thedevisingofnewwaysofattaining
invention
givenends.
stillfurther,
We mightwidenthedefinition
by includingthe
as inventions,
of newendsthemselves
devisingor suggesting
but thiswouldprobablyinvolvetoo greata departurefrom
I 934]
ECONOMIC
THEORY
CONCERNING
PATENTS
33
34
ECONOMICA
[FEBRUARY
he says,' is stillsuigeneris,
and emergesfromtheranks
inventor,'
of engineers,physicists,
and chemists,notindeedas a " sport,"
but as a special product,which is touched by no " economic
spring." The sense of curiosityand the idea of fame play a
greaterpartthanthe economicreward.' Not all of the inventors, however,whose output is involuntary,are impervious
to prospectsof gain. Like artists,somemayturntheirtalentto
profitableuse. The amountand rateof flowmaybe invariable,
but its directionmaybe influencedby inducementsof one sort
or another. Inventingmay be spontaneous,but the natureor
formthatit takes may be controlledby circumstance.It will
probablybe generallyagreed thatthe numberof" involuntary
inventors" whoseoutputis completelyunaffected
by economic
conditionsis at least as small as thatof artistswho workwithout regardto the saleabilityof theiroutput.
More definitelyin the categoryof " spontaneous" inventionsare thosewhichare made by accident,forthe most part
no doubt as the chance by-productof activitydirected to
some otherpurpose. Every scientificworkerknows how frequentlyan enquiryleads to discoverieswhichanswerquestions
fromthose which promptedthe investigation.
verydifferent
Undoubtedly, in the field of invention,contrivancesare
accidentallyhit upon in the same way; but in all probability,
the majorityof these "chance" inventionsare also indirectly
" induced "-one stage removed,as it were-for the greater
part of the activityout of which they arise is influencedby
circumstance.Of a somewhatsimilarcharacter,again, are the
inventionsof" amateurs" who,wheninspectingthespecialised
techniqueof a particularfieldof production,being prompted
by curiosityratherthan hope of gain, are enabled by their
unusual possession of experienceof some other technique to
and new devices which fail to occur to
suggestimprovements
the minds of practitionersthemselves. The timing,at least,
of such inventionsis undoubtedlylargelyfortuitous.
I0. Induced inventionsowe at any rate their nature, if
not theirvolume,to the circumstancesof timeand place. One
the amountof inventionsis clearly
verypotentcause affecting
the rate of growthof scientificknowledge. The greaterthe
volume of new scientificdiscoveries,the more rapid will become the rate of applicationof these discoveriesby inventors
to purposes of production. Inventiondoes not, of course,
wait upon the completionof scientificdiscovery. As William
Edward Hearn wroteseventyyearsago, in what is surelystill
I 934]
ECONOMIC
THEORY
CONCERNING
PATENTS
35
36
ECONOMICA
[FEBRUARY
1934]
PATENTS
37
....
38
ECONOMICA
[FEBRUARY
I 934]
ECONOMIC
THEORY
CONCERNING
PATENTS
39
40
ECONOMICA
[FEBRUARY
I934]
ECONOMIC
THEORY
CONCERNING
PATENTS
41
political economy," emphasised the dangers of an overstimulationof inventionsby the patent system. Yet at the
beginningofthiscenturyProfessorJ.B. Clarkwas stillwriting:
"If the patentedarticleis somethingwhich societywithouta
patentsystemwould not have secured at all-the inventor's
42
ECONOMICA
[FEBRUARY
I934]
ECONOMIC
THEORY
CONCERNING
PATENTS
43
44
ECONOMICA
[FEBRRUARY
" [A
patent]
I 934]
ECONOMIC
THEORY
CONCERNING
PATENTS
45
46
ECONOMICA
[FEBRUARY
I 934]
ECONOMIC
THEORY
CONCERNING
PATENTS
47
48
ECONOMICA
[FEBRUARY
934]
ECONOMIC
THEORY
PATENT S
CONCERNING
49
Section24
(I)
(b)]
I93I,
threeof these
50
ECONOMICA
[FEBRUARY
being
the period(about 20,000 new completespecifications
addedeachyear). The factthatin all casesthelicencefeehas
bythe
recourseto arbitration
without
beenfixedbyagreement
wouldsuggestthatthepatenteesecuresa royalty
Comptroller
fromthatwhichhe believeswill adjustthe
not fardifferent
totaloutputto the amountwhichmaximiseshis monopoly
profit.
of
thattheadjustment
If we wereto maketheassumption
volume of output to given price conditionstakes place
havebroadlythesameprofirms
and thatdifferent
promptly,
ductioncosts,thepositionwouldthenbe thatthevolumeof
outputwouldremainmoreorlessthesameas thatwhichwould
emergeunderthe ordinarypatentsystem,whilethe patent
half its revenueto littlegood
officewould have forfeited
is concerned.We cannot,
public
general
the
as
purpose,so far
firms
costsofdifferent
production
that
either
assume
however,
are identical,or thata sole licenseewill rapidlyexpandhis
outputand sales to the pointof maximumnet revenue. It
appearsveryprobablethatthe Licence of Right
therefore
byenablinganyproducerto tryhishandat producing
system,
the operationof competitive
the patentedarticle,facilitates
whichhavelowest
outputin thefirms
forcesin concentrating
overa
ofproduction
therapidspreading
costs,and encourages
so thattheaggregateoutputis in fact
numberof producers,
increasedmorerapidlyto the pointof maximummonopoly
profit(if the patenteefixeshis termsto his best advantage)
be likely(ifitdoesnotin factexceedthat
thanwouldotherwise
amountfora time,to thelossofcertainlicensees).This device
servesto increaseoutput,forwithoutit the
certainly
-almost
wouldprobablynotas rapidlydecideto grantas
monopolist
manylicencesto theproducerswhosecostsare lowest.
so
injuringthe monopolist'sinterest,
Without,therefore,
himself
he
at
the
point
toremain
longas licencetermscontinue
selects,thelicence-ofrightsystemtendsto correctone ofthe
i.e. theslownessofthe
tothepatentsystem,
objections
practical
it
articles.
If, therefore,
of
patented
of
the
output
expansion
wouldconassumedthattheComptroller
couldbe reasonably
to evadethealarmingtaskof fixingterms,
tinuesuccessfully
the
therewould be muchto be said in favourof modifying
patentsystemso that licencesof rightbecamethe normal
inwhichthedevicewas first
practice.In thecaseofcopyright,
applied,theproblemof termscouldbe settled-ifcrudelyofso muchpercent.ofthepriceofthebook
a royalty
byfixing
1934]
ECONOMIC
THEORY
CONCERNING
PATENTS
5I