Benefits Of Invention Research Articles

Content Analysis of Patent Applications for Strength Training Equipment Filed in the United States Before 1980.

Nuzzo, JL. Content analysis of patent applications for strength training equipment filed in the United States before 1980. J Strength Cond Res 35(10): 2952–2962, 2021—Strength training history is an emerging academic area. The aim of the current study was to describe quantitively the history of inventions for strength training equipment. Content analysis was conducted of patent applications for strength training equipment filed with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office before 1980. Applications were identified using relevant keyword searches in Google Patents. A total of 551 patent applications were analyzed. The earliest application identified was filed in 1860. Applications never exceed 6 per year until 1961 after which applications increased substantially, with a peak of 54 in 1979. Men invented 98.7% of all strength training devices. Lloyd J. Lambert, Jr. was the most prolific inventor, with 10 inventions. Types of inventions included mobile units (34.5%), stationary machines (27.9%), dumbbells (16%), racks or benches (8.0%), barbells (6.7%), and Indian clubs (3.8%). Common features included seats or benches (18.7%), cable-pulley systems (15.1%), weight stacks (8.2%), weight trays (4.5%), and cams (2.2%). Common types of resistance included weights or plates (33.2%), springs (11.6%), friction (9.1%), elastic bands (5.3%), and hydraulic (3.8%). Proposed invention benefits included adjustable resistance (37.4%), inexpensive (36.1%), simple to use (32.8%), compact design or easy storage (27.0%), multiple exercise options (26.1%), safety and comfort (25.4%), effectiveness (23.6%), portability (20.5%), adjustable size (15.8%), sturdiness or durability (15.8%), home use (13.6%), and light weight (13.6%). Certain aspects of strength training equipment have evolved over time. However, overall purposes and benefits of inventions have remained constant (e.g., affordability, convenience, personalization, safety, and effectiveness).

Factor Income Taxation in a Horizontal Innovation Model

We consider the optimal factor income taxation in a standard R&D model with technical change represented by an increase in the variety of intermediate goods. Redistributing the tax burden from labor to capital will in most cases increase the employment rate in equilibrium. This has opposite effects on two distortions in the model, one due to monopoly power, the second to the incomplete appropriability of the benefi ts of inventions. Their relative momentum determines the sign of the welfare effect of the redistribution. We show that, for parameter values consistent with available estimates, the optimal tax rate on capital will be sizable.

A World without Intellectual Property? A Review of Michele Boldrin and David Levine's Against Intellectual Monopoly

In their recent book, Against Intellectual Monopoly, Michele Boldrin and David Levine conclude that patents and copyrights are not necessary to provide protection for either innovation or creative expression and should be eliminated. The authors note the many flaws of the U.S. system of intellectual property protection and argue that other means are available to appropriate the benefits of invention and creative expression. While the authors overlook important functions of intellectual property, they provide support for further reforms of intellectual property law. (JEL K11, O31, O34)

Innovation: Meager Private Gains, Enormous Social Gains

Abstract There is strong evidence that invention is an activity that is very risky for the inventor and that those who participate in the invention process, taken as a group, obtain a minuscule share of the benefits. Nevertheless, the evidence also indicates that the social benefits of invention in recent centuries have been enormous. Yet, the relatively few examples of enormous payoffs to the inventors and their investors may serve, like the multimillion dollar prizes offered by some lotteries, to stimulate a level of inventive activity that may even be close to the social optimum.

The "Invisible Hand"

The argument of the "Invisible Hand" is that the system of free enterprise benefits society in general even though it is not the aim of any particular economic agent to do that. This article proposes an analysis of why this is so. The key is that the morality of the market forbids only force and fraud; it does not require people to do good to others. Nevertheless, when all transactions are voluntary to both parties, that is exactly what we can expect to happen. This is both because the sum of the benefits of innumerable transactions, which are beneficial to both parties, is very great, but also and especially because of Positive Externalities. People use the particular products and services they get in market exchanges in ways that benefit others in ways not at all foreseen by the agents to those transactions at the time. These externalities range from the benefits of invention and ingenuity to the exercise of charity and philanthropy, all of which flourish in developed capitalist societies.