Patenting Inventions?

Patenting inventions can be a difficult decision to make if the individual or institution has many inventions but there is financial constraint eg university technology transfer offices. One practical consideration is whether the inventions will result in new products or processes. The types of innovation (whether basic, sustainable, disruptive or breakthrough) would generally suggest the way forward.

If the inventions are the results of basic research ie both the problem and the domain are not well defined, they seldom lead to direct inventive products or processes that the market needs. It may not be worthwhile for individuals or institutions, particularly university technology transfer offices to commit financial resources in patenting and maintaining them. The same would also apply to inventions which are the results of disruptive innovation (the problem is not well defined but the domain is well defined).

If the inventions are the results of sustainable innovation ie well-defined problem and well defined domain, they often lead to improved products or processes that the market needs. It is therefore worthwhile for individuals or institutions to invest in them by patenting them. The same would also apply to inventions which are the results of breakthrough innovation (the problem is well defined, but the domain is not well defined).

However, there are innovative institutions such as venture capitalists who might like to invest in results of basic and disruptive research on a case-by-case basis, as nothing ventured, nothing gained. There is therefore the likelihood that any inventions not pursued eg by university technology transfer offices might still have latent economic value that others, through a different framework, might like to invest the money to patent and maintain them. From the governance perspective, I think it is fair and reasonable for individuals or institutions that have decided not to pursue patenting of the inventions by themselves to have a non-exclusive licence for good research purposes (as the statutory exceptions might not be broad enough) so that they could still invent something out of something they invented in the first place without much restraint.