27 January 2010

No Need to Wait (or Pay) for Climate Technology

Posted in News, Energy, Technology

The Global Innovation Commons is a massive interactive archive of energy-saving technologies already in the public domain.
Large tech companies like to claim that they need broad patents to encourage their investment in innovative new technologies. And they are poised to make a fortune by selling patent licenses for new “green technologies” designed to abate carbon emissions.

But David E. Martin, an intellectual property activist who works with many developing countries, argues that a great many green technologies are already in the public domain and ready to be developed. They just need to be identified and used.

Martin’s brilliant and subversive innovation, launched earlier this month, is called the Global Innovation Commons (GIC). The project is described in a cover article in the German magazine Der Spiegel called "Patent Lies: Who Says Saving the Planet Has to Cost a Fortune?"

The Global Innovation Commons is a massive interactive archive of energy-saving technologies whose patents have expired, been abandoned, or simply have no protection. The idea is to let entrepreneurs and national governments query the database on a country-by-country basis to identify helpful technologies that are in the public domain. Once identified, these technologies for energy, water, and agriculture are prime candidates for being developed at lower costs than patented technologies.

The World Bank is a partner on this project, along with the International Finance Corporation’s infoDev unit. The World Bank has estimated that the technologies in the GIC database could save more than $2 trillion in potential license fees. The Global Innovation Commons essentially seeks to bring the advantages of the open-source software development model—open participation, faster innovation, greater reliability, cheaper costs—to technologies that are claimed to be patented.

Here’s how the Global Information Commons describes the role of patents in impeding innovation—and how the new database helps establish a new open-innovation commons:

For the past 30 years, patents have been abused. Rather than serving the public’s expansion of knowledge, they’ve been used as business and legal weapons. Over 50,000,000 patents covering everything you do have served to keep you from benefiting in many aspects of your life. Many life-saving treatments have been kept from the market because they threaten established business interests. The world’s ecosystem has been severely damaged because efficiencies have been kept from entering the market.

In the face of all this, however, there is the good news: The thirty-year “cold war” of innovation is over. Today, you now have access to it all. In the Global Innovation Commons, we have assembled hundreds of thousands of innovations—most in the form of patents—which are either expired, no longer maintained (meaning that the fees to keep the patents in force have lapsed), disallowed, or unprotected in most, if not all, relevant markets. This means that, as of right now, you can take a step into a world full of possibilities, not roadblocks. You want clean water for China or Sudan—it’s in here. You want carbon-free energy—it’s in here. You want food production for Asia or South America—it’s in here.

Der Spiegel notes that the Global Information Commons database represents such a huge advance because it aggregates so many different patent-free technologies from so many different parts of the world:

[Martin’s] custom-made software and a vast server are programmed to trawl and compare hundreds of thousands of files containing patent information from what would seem an incongruous list of places: Papua New Guinea, Berlin, the Brazilian rain forest, New York. Some of these patents are current; others have expired. What Martin—and those who work with him at M-CAM—say they found is that one in three patents registered today on energy-saving technology duplicate gadgets that were first dreamed up in the wake of the 1970s oil crisis and are now freely available.

Martin says that a great many patents are not novel at all. They simply duplicate innovations that were made decades ago. But patent applications often disguise this fact by using colorful and complicated language. Overworked government patent examiners, struggling with limited resources and seeking to avoid legal hassles, often grant new patents that are not truly warranted.



http://www.yesmagazine.org/planet/no-need-to-wait-or-pay-for-climate-technology

Comments (3)

  • Dan

    Dan

    24 May 2012 at 19:13 |
    That's pretty azinamg indeed. Growing up in the Pacific Northwest, I still remember lighting store commercials over the radio talking about track lighting from Lightolier. Horst was a good Flickr Friend he commented often on my images. He is missed.
  • Yadiel

    Yadiel

    24 May 2012 at 04:59 |
    That is so cool. And such a wonderful way to think of him when you turn on your lgiths!I loved it when Horst would play with lgiths in his photo studio (the garage). Seems he had a deep understanding of the importance of light!His light shines on in many ways.
  • Krzysztof

    Krzysztof

    08 April 2012 at 08:12 |
    Because your scenario is not true and does not make any sense.A tepant is in effect a contract between the state and an inventor. The inventor is given a period during which he has a monopoly on sale, manufacturing, and use of his invention. In exchange for that, the inventor must reveal all the details of his product. Anyone can go to the tepant office online and search for any granted tepant. Since there are no magical tepants that make electric cars useful, it follows that nothing is being covered up or hidden by the poil companies.

    In fact, it would be idiotic for any company to do something like that. Let's imagine that I invent a way to make a battery that would power a car for a week without a chargeup, and with no excess weight or other drawback (it's a practical impossibility of course, but pretend).

    Why would I not SELL this product on the open market, generating billions in profits? In 20 yrs, this product will become available to anyone who wants to produce it so it would be idiotic to refuse to sell the product so I could sell more oil, oil that everyone knows is running out. Rather, it would make more sense to switch my business to selling electric cars, so that 20 years from now, I am the only company that customers even THINK about buying.It's nonsense, and doesn't work even if it wasn't.

Leave a comment

You are commenting as guest. Optional login below.