The good news this week is that it appears that no binding treaty is going to come out of next month's Copenhagen conference on climate change.
This is good news for any number of reasons, but ironically, it’s also good news for ”green tech” – technologies that promise to produce energy from new sources or result in increased energy efficiency.
Yes, that’s right: It’s good for green tech that an international climate agreement has been stalled, at least for now.
That’s because a key demand by many of the parties at the negotiating table is that patent protection on anything labeled green tech be weakened or even eliminated in the name of facilitating technology transfer to developing countries.
In case you don’t know, there is a strong international movement (with complicit fellow-travelers in the U.S. and other industrialized countries) that argues that patents are simply a form of “knowledge imperialism” through which the developed world holds knowledge hostage or keeps it restricted from those who need it most—the developing world.
Of course, this is rubbish. Patents are an ingenious combination of knowledge disclosure and property rights. Both the inventor and the larger community benefit from patents, because the patent entirely and completely discloses the details of the invention, but in exchange gives innovators some marginal security that, if they develop something useful, they will be able to exploit it, trade it, license it, sell it, or otherwise leverage their work. A patent by no means guarantees profits, as any inventor or innovator can attest. But patents at least make profits possible.
But the global IP skeptic movement uses any available issue to rail against patents and to demand that patents be weakened or even eliminated. They've been quick to jump on the climate change bandwagon, using it as yet another excuse to argue against patent rights in what is sure to be one of the most critical areas of future innovation, green tech.
Whatever the reality behind the climate change issue (real, exaggerated or imagined), green tech innovation should help us diversify our energy portfolio, reduce our dependency on foreign fuel sources, and continue to lead the world in technological innovation. But it won’t happen without the rights and incentives that exist through the patent system.
So join with us in hoping for continued failure of the Copenhagen talks, understanding that such failure is ironically a good omen for green innovation.
Today's TechByte was written by IPI President, Tom Giovanetti.