Would American inventors keep expending that imbalanced blend of inspiration and perspiration if their rights to their creations were not properly protected?
The origin of American patent law can be found in Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution, which empowers Congress "to promote the progress of science and useful arts by securing for limited times to . . . inventors the exclusive right to their . . . discoveries." In his book The Making of America, constitutional scholar Cleon Skousen cites this safeguard as an important factor "contributing to the unprecedented development of inventions and advanced industrial techniques in the United States."
The first patent law was passed over 200 years ago, in 1790. "In 1870," Skousen observes, "the numerous patent laws were consolidated and revised. This became the framework for the patent law which is still used today. The most recent patent law went into effect January 1, 1953," he continues. "The patentee is given the exclusive right to manufacture, use, and sell the invention for 17 years. In order to get a patent, the inventor must be willing to disclose the complete operation of his invention."
How does our patent law encourage creativity? "When an inventor can obtain a monopoly for 17 years," Skousen explains, "the expenditure of time and money to bring out a new invention becomes profitable and worthwhile." Until now, with one glaring exception, that valuable, motivational monopoly has been scrupulously protected. "The patent office will provide copies of any patent for a small fee," Skousen observes, "but will not allow anyone to even examine applications for patents which are still in process of review and are not yet protected. Anyone obtaining a copy of a patent must not use it to violate the rights of the patentee."
The one glaring exception occurred at the behest of Franklin Delano Roosevelt. "One of the most controversial things President Roosevelt did during World War II," Skousen recalls, "was to open the files of the patent office to the agents of the Soviet Union, who copied hundreds of thousands of American patents with the obvious intent of using them in the Russian technology without paying anything to the inventors or their heirs for the privilege."
The Clinton administration is engaged in similar shenanigans. In 1993 the Japan Patent Association demanded changes in the U.S. patent system that would facilitate foreign access to American ingenuity. Secretary of Commerce Ron Brown was somehow persuaded to acquiesce. Patent legislation currently under consideration by Congress could write those changes into law, thereby weakening the protections enjoyed by American inventors.
Radical changes in our current system -- such as requiring patent applications to be published before a patent is issued -- would increase the opportunities for unscrupulous foreign and multinational corporations to expropriate the intellectual property of our creative countrymen. The result would be detrimental to all Americans and could bring to a sudden standstill the incredible cavalcade of scientific and technological marvels that has characterized our sensational century.
