EYE ON WASHINGTON
Let’s Get Facts on Trump First SILICON VALLEY ALREADY GIVES HIM LOW MARKS ON INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ISSUES BY PETER HARTER AND GENE QUINN
G
overnment’s patent reform news alerts have circulated an article from the website Ars Technica, highlighting how bad President-Elect Donald Trump would be on intellectual property issues—mostly because he does not have specific positions. Ars Technica completely missing the point of a patent story is almost too much a cliché to bother to point out by now, but the website is not alone. Others from Silicon Valley and the technology policy community, such as Engine, have ranked candidates and gave Trump low grades for not having a clear position. Recently at Mark Lemley’s annual patent conference at Stanford Law School, an attorney who does work for Netflix and other Silicon Valley giants openly said that Trump’s campaign website had no stated position on patent reform while Hillary Clinton’s explicitly talked up the need for venue reform. The implication: If you are not in favor of a never-ending revision of U.S. patent laws, you are somehow an ignorant rube not paying attention to the overwhelming consensus in the industry that vast new patent reform measures are desperately necessary to save America from the evils of innovators hellbent on innovating. There is no consensus on patent reform. The coalition against patent reform has slowed, then stalled and finally stopped patent reform, at least for now. Trump not having a clear, well-defined position on a patent reform agenda just means he is paying attention.
What we know
That said, it is still important to factcheck those who might have you believe that Trump has no positions on intellectual property-related issues because that is not true. With the ability of Silicon Valley to create new tools for sharing and discovering content, it is rather amazing that
Donald Trump not having a clear, well-defined position on a patent reform agenda just means he is paying attention. it professes so little understanding about Trump’s views on IP issues. Basic facts: • Trump’s campaign website, in the trade section, calls for the U.S. to go after China and others for stealing American IP. • The GOP campaign platform unveiled in Cleveland for the convention in July openly said two things about IP: (a) Patents are a private property right, like land protected by the Constitution; and (b) Theft of IP is so bad, it is a national security issue. • John G. Trump, Donald Trump’s uncle, was a well-regarded inventor, scientist and entrepreneur. He served in World War II, inventing new radar technologies and then building a company while teaching at MIT, inventing high powered lasers to address cancer. His work was recognized by Presidents Truman and Reagan. • Trump, like it or not, has proven capable of monetizing his own name and personality while spanning the varied businesses of real property, entertainment,
sports and consumer products. Much of Trump’s wealth is tied up in the value of the various Trump trademarks and his own likeness, both of which are intellectual property assets that he has licensed and understands how to commercialize. He understands the business end of commercializing these types of IP assets as well as anyone in America. • Trump has been an outspoken critic of the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade agreement negotiated by the Obama Administration. The TPP presents very real and damaging consequences for the intellectual property rights of biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies. Blocking this agreement, or renegotiating this agreement, would be welcomed by many in the biotech and pharma industries. The next few months will be busy for the Trump transition team, so it is unclear how existing patent reform bills may resurface in 2017—although we can be sure some will seek to have patent reform take center stage again. Since 2005, we have seen lots of bumper sticker headlines about trolls and the urgent need for patent reform. But in time these headlines have been rebutted and shown as false, based on poor analysis and/or incomplete data. The real story is about efficient infringement, which is code for stealing rights without paying. Perhaps Ars Technica and others who are predisposed to wanting to see President-Elect Trump fail should use the opportunity of the transition period to gather facts about his views on IP so that we start 2017 with a complete and objective record. Wouldn’t that be refreshing? As the founder of The Farrington Group, Peter Harter advises public and private companies, investors, startups and nonprofits on risks from legislation, regulation, court cases, standards, politics and more.
DECEMBER 2016 INVENTORS DIGEST
43