An Inside Look at the US Patent System

There is a big debate currently over the value of patents. In concept, they are designed to encourage innovation by granting an inventor a limited monopoly on his idea. In theory, this is great. Countries at the top of the food chain have increasingly become dependent on intellectual capital for maintaining their competitive advantage. As a citizen of the United States, it is in my own best interest to encourage innovation.

However, after listening to noted patent attorney Michael Shamos speak last Thursday, I find myself once again questioning the system that is currently in place. Shamos, in particular raised the concern that a large number of bad patents are being granted for business processes.

One of the concerns is that patent examiners are underpaid and overworked. According to Shamos, examiners, who often do not speak English natively, are pushed to quickly review the many technical patent applications that are filed every week. Often, an examiner will only review the current patent database when deciding whether an idea is novel or not.

This then becomes a major concern, when coupled with the State Street Bank decision in 1998 to abolish limits on software and business methods. Since business process patents are still very uncommon in the patent database, a patent examiner will find it difficult to find similar ideas already patented.

This leads to scenarios such as Amazon.com patenting the idea of 1-click shopping. In effect, this concept patents the idea of not using a shopping cart when buying goods. Clearly, this idea is not unique in the world of bricks and mortar. However, when applied to the Internet, it becomes patentable.