Patent Failure: How Judges, Bureaucrats, & Lawyers Put Innovators at Risk

James Bessen, Michael J. Meurer

In recent years, business leaders, policymakers, and inventors have complained to the media and to Congress that today's patent system stifles innovation instead of fostering it. But like the infamous patent on the peanut butter and jelly sandwich, much of the cited evidence about the patent system is pure anecdote--making realistic policy formation difficult. Is the patent system fundamentally broken, or can it be fixed with a few modest reforms? Moving beyond rhetoric, Patent Failure provides the first authoritative and comprehensive look at the economic performance of patents in forty years. James Bessen and Michael Meurer ask whether patents work well as property rights, and, if not, what institutional and legal reforms are necessary to make the patent system more effective. Patent Failure presents a wide range of empirical evidence from history, law, and economics.

Politics & GovernmentPolitics & Government · medium confidencePolitics & Government81 signalsLlm Classifier: Politics & Government -> Politics & GovernmentKeyword Classifier: Arts & Criticism -> Arts & CriticismTopic Classifier: Art, Music & Performance -> Arts & CriticismArt, Music & PerformanceBusiness, Capitalism & CorporationsEssays & Cultural CriticismGender & Feminism
Experimental book profileGenerated by GPT-5.4 nano · may contain inaccuracies

This is an unverified interpretation of the catalog description, offered as an opt-in discovery experiment—not as bibliographic fact.

  1. 01 Central figures

    None extracted with sufficient confidence.

  2. 02 Central places

    None extracted with sufficient confidence.

  3. 03 Suggested argument

    Patents may not work well as property rights, and the patent system needs institutional and legal reforms to improve its effectiveness for innovation and economic performance.

    Model confidence 78%

  4. 04 Reading orientation

    75 / 100 academic

    Academic

    An estimate of intended readership and scholarly apparatus—not quality or importance.

Confidence percentages are the model's own estimates. Profile confidence: 70%.