In a knowledge economy, new, achieved knowledge replaces cheap labor or raw materials as the basis for prosperity. Knowledge, identified and protected through intellectual property rights, is a key driver of economic growth, which creates jobs, pays salaries, and renders tax revenue to governments.
By contrast, the “information wants to be free” crowd proclaims a very destructive idea by failing to distinguish between information noise and valuable knowledge.
Recent developments demonstrate just how important IP rights are to innovation and the economy, and why we need to ensure we get it right.
Last week the U.S. Supreme Court released its much-anticipated decision in the Myriad Genetics case, ruling that naturally occurring genes, even though isolated through highly sophisticated means, cannot be patented (though the Court did allow that modified human genes may be patented).
Opinions vary on whether this was the correct decision, but all observers agree that the consequences will be far reaching—especially the economic consequences. It is simply less profitable now to invest in such research than it would have been had the Court decided otherwise.
Now the biotech industry is wondering whether the Court’s reasoning will extend beyond human genes to proteins, enzymes and agriculturally important plants, where major industries employ thousands of people and commit millions of dollars to innovative research and development. Those industries may already be finding it marginally more difficult to raise capital for R&D, and they’ll be inclined to rely more upon trade secrets, which truly do lock away knowledge.
Meanwhile, the Supreme Court of India has denied a patent for Novartis’ breakthrough cancer drug Glivec, which has been patented in 40 countries, including China and Russia. The Indian court’s decision sends a message that India does not take seriously the importance of intellectual property rights. India’s Ministry of Science &Technology may claim that country wants to stimulate advanced research and development in cutting-edge science, but its Court’s decision to deny basic patent protection sends the opposite message, and will very much have the opposite effect. India definitely got it wrong.
And now, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte has announced that his committee will conduct a comprehensive review of U.S. copyright law. While such a review is appropriate given the challenges affecting copyright by the digital revolution, it is crucial that the review begin with the recognition that, in copyright, we’ve gotten our knowledge policy pretty much right. Our current copyright system has created a culture of creativity, innovation, investment and wealth creation upon which depend thousands of jobs and positive net exports for the United States, and which is the envy of the world. And that’s saying something.
June 20, 2013