Patent Nonuse and the Role of Public Interest as a Deterrent to Technology Suppression

: Patent Nonuse and the Role of Public Interest as a Deterrent to Technology Suppression

Author

Patents are contracts between the society and the inventor to encourage development in the field of science and technology . It helps the society by enabling them to utilize this technology , and the inventor by protecting his rights and rewarding him appropriately for this intellectual efforts and innovations . Once a patent is given by the patent office , the inventor has to work the invention by himself or through somebody else by means of an assignment or a

license

The patent office does not look at the potential commercial value of the invention whilst giving the patent . The invention should have a specific use and should fulfill what it is meant to do . Many inventions given patents have turned to be commercial failures . However , there are several instances in which neither the patentee has worked the invention by himself , nor has he allowed others interested to do so . This is a very serious situation , because it goes against the very intention of granting the patent . The patent system grants patents only to those inventors who are willing to reveal their invention with others , so that it can benefit society

Some patentees may not work their invention due to several reasons , one of which may be to wrongfully hide or suppress technology from the public . One of the first such cases was the Continental Bag Co v . Eastern Bag Co . case of 1908 . In this case , the patentee had invented a machine that could make a folded bag with a rectangular bottom . However , he had not made his invention available to the public thus preventing others from working the invention . At that time , this invention was a breakthrough , and many people felt bad , because the very intention of giving a patent was not fulfilled . No concrete rules regarding nonuse of patents and compulsory licenses were existent at that time , and everything was left at the mercy of the patent holder Lower courts also found that the patentee was unreasonable . They in fact tried to draw a line between `reasonable nonuse policy (inventor unable to use his invention because or some understandable problems ) and `unreasonable nonuse policy (purposefully suppressing technology However , as no concrete rules existed at that time , the higher court had to give its decision in favor of the rightful owner of the invention

Many breakthrough technologies exist which are being currently suppressed from the public . A plastic that is strong , long-lasting , and can be utilized to make houses that last forever , was granted patents but not accessible to the public by the owner . New rubber for tires is invented which does not blow up . If this technology could be utilized currently , the lives of many people who die in road accidents could be saved . A new material has been invented for use in toothpastes , which protects the teeth from developing cavities . These technologies are being suppressed due to the anticompetitive intentions of...