Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-skm99 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T18:10:03.850Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

9 - The Search for Alernatives to Patents in the Twenty-First Century

from Part III - Going Forward: Towards a Knowledge Governance Research Agenda

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 April 2013

Luigi Palombi
Affiliation:
Australian National University
Get access

Summary

Introduction

During the mid-nineteenth century, a debate took place in Europe and Great Britain about the merits of patent monopolies. At its height, the Netherlands repealed its patent law, Switzerland refused to enact one (see Schiff 1971), German economists voted to abolish patent monopolies (see Seckelmann 2001), and there was a succession of inquiries into the workings of the British patent system, the last in 1872, recommending the length of the British patent monopoly be halved from 14 years to 7 years (see Palombi 2009).

Alternatives to patent monopolies were also mooted. John Stuart Mill, a British economist, proposed that inventors be given “pecuniary rewards.” Although supportive of patent monopolies, in his treatise Principles of Political Economy he suggested that in lieu of patents, “a small temporary tax, imposed for the inventors benefit, on all persons making use of the invention” would suffice. In France, Michel Chevalier, an economist and one of France's leading exponents of free trade, agreed. And in Switzerland, the creation of a statutory fund from which inventors would be paid a reward, more like one-off prizes rather than royalty streams paid over time, was considered (see Ritter 2004).

The turning point, however, came with the first international patent convention held in Vienna in August 1873 (see Palombi 2009). This was the event that stemmed the antipatent tide in Europe. By 1883, the convention's resolutions had been incorporated into the world's first international intellectual property treaty, the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property, and by 1893, the United International Bureaux for the Protection of Intellectual Property, the forerunner to the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), was established in Berne, Switzerland.

Type
Chapter
Information
Knowledge Governance
Reasserting the Public Interest
, pp. 227 - 269
Publisher: Anthem Press
Print publication year: 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×