Progress Of Useful Arts Research Articles

Active Promotion of Useful Arts

The U.S. Constitution grants Congress the power “[t]o promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.” To this end, Congress created the copyright system “[t]o promote the Progress of Science” and the patent system for promoting the progress of useful arts. The American patent system can be though of as a vehicle for converting an intangible idea into a form of property. Since the beginning of the American patent system, social benefit has been a key component of the decision to grant a patent. Some view patent rights as a form of monopoly, termed a “patent monopoly.” Because early Americans had strong anti-monopoly sentiments, their decision to institute a system that would allow for a patent monopoly demonstrates a recognition of the importance of furthering collective knowledge. However, a patent can be essentially worthless if its owner is unable to enforce it. While a patent confers the right to exclude others from making, using, or selling whatever the patent claims, this right has been restated by some to actually be more akin to “a right to try to exclude” others. One reason is that the right to exclude can only be exercised on the condition that the patent owner also has the financial means to exclude. There is no criminal penalty for patent infringement. Instead, patent infringement is strictly a civil matter and patent owners are responsible for the costs associated with enforcement. Thus, if a patent owner is unable to afford the cost of litigation, the right to exclude might as well not exist.

A Unitary Progress Clause

Since the middle of the 20th Century, the Progress Clause of the Constitution has been read in a distributive manner. That is to say, it is read as granting two separate powers: the power to promote the progress of science through copyright, and the power to promote the progress of useful arts through patent. This dichotomy has led to some confusion in certain subject matter areas that span the two regimes, like architectural works, computer programs, and design patents. In addition, because the distributive reading effectively separates copyright and patent, this reading may undermine certain doctrines, such as copyright’s secondary liability or misuse doctrines, which have evolved based on the presumed relationship between the regimes. The Article follows the framework laid out in District of Columbia v. Heller, which combined a structural analysis with a historical review. Based on this analysis, the Article concludes that a unitary reading of the Progress Clause is the only appropriate reading.

Workshop on intellectual property rights an overview of patenting requirements

The urgency to publish is crucial to the progress of science and to an individual scientist’s professional development. However, patents are important commodities in today’s competitive marketplace. The framers of the Constitution recognized the contribution of inventors and authors and sought to encourage their efforts. The resulting provision, adopted in September 1787, became Clause 8 of Section 8, Article I of the Constitution of the United States. ‘The Congress shall have power… to promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries.’ In essence, a US patent can be viewed as a contract between the inventor and the United States government. The inventor provides a novel and useful idea and in return is awarded a legal monopoly. That is, the patent grants the right to the inventor to ‘exclude others’ from making, using or selling a claimed invention. The granting of a patent right accomplishes the objectives of rewarding the inventor for his or her skill and labor in conceiving and perfecting the invention, stimulates the inventor as well as others to further efforts in the same or different fields, and secures to the public an immediate knowledge of the character and scope of the invention and an unrestricted right to use the invention after the patent has expired. Section 101 of the Federal Patent Statute further promotes the progress of the useful arts and sets forth: ‘Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.’ The statute also identifies patentable subject matter. To qualify for patent protection, inventions must fall into the categories of process, machine, manufacture, or compositions of matter. The statute further requires that an invention be novel, useful, and nonobvious.