Re: The Basic Question: Why??

> Pam Samuelson writes:
> >
> > Why do patents and copyrights have such different terms? History is
> > only part of the story. And it is interesting that patents and
> > copyrights started out being more similar in length than they are today.
> > The Statute of Anne provided authors with exclusive rights for 14 years
> > (a period that for a very long time was the patent duration). Patent
> > rights are shorter today than copyrights because of the social utility
> > of having more competition sooner in the production of functional items
> > than with literary and artistic works. Copyrights also have (at least
> > theoretically) a thin scope of protection so that others can develop
> > competing works as long as they express the same ideas differently.
> > Some years ago the Journal of the Patent Office Society published a
> > very nice essay on why there is a 17 year patent; you might find
> > additional information on the patent duration there.

Don Berman writes:
>
> I agree with all of Pam's comments and would just make several additonal
> thoughts. We seem to be extending copyright protection to many times the
> length of the patent protection because of our entrance into Berne. The
> Berne duration stems from the civilian notion of copyright which comes at
> the protection from the natural right of the author rather than from the
> more utilitarian approach used in most common law countries.
>
> Second, I suspect that it is time to rethink the length of period of
> protection for a patent. I believe that some countries are experimenting
> with systems that relate the length of the patent to some measurement of
> investment and creativity. We're having to face that issue now with the
> time it takes, for example, to gain approval for drugs.

     I take it that we may very well be reconsidering the length of the patent term, not for any grand philsophical reason but in order to harmonize our patent law with international conventions. There is now a bill to extend to 20 years but from the date of filing, not issuance. So the issue is timely. On the other hand, whatever we might think of the issue in the abstract, the response is likely to be dictgated by global politics. Welcome to the global economy.

Harvey Perlman
University of Nebraska Received on Fri Mar 04 1994 - 03:28:19 GMT