Patenting of inventions can be notoriously expensive; however,
the monopoly attracted because of it has the potential to exceed,
by far, any initial patenting costs. The problem remains that a
decision on whether to patent an invention often has to be made
long before the commercial potential of an invention can readily be
adjudged. How then should one decide what to patent and what not to
patent?
A tension has always existed between the monopoly that attracts
by reason of patents, and competition law, which seeks to even the
commercial playing field, thereby preventing monopolies.
But patenting is about more than a monopoly – so it has
been advocated for many years. It is about a quid pro quo
(or "something for something") – a temporary
monopoly in exchange for knowledge transfer and the advancement of
the state of the art. The monopoly is the proverbial carrot that
entices innovators and investors to continue pursuing improvement
and sharing same with the public
