Patent Paradox: When Protection Becomes Proliferation

Authors

Austin Talir

Abstract

This paper examines the problematic practice of double patenting and patent proliferation within the United States patent system, analyzing how these practices undermine the constitutional mandate to “promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts.” The analysis demonstrates how double patenting—both statutory and nonstatutory types—enables companies to extend monopolistic control beyond the intended 20-year patent term, creating significant economic distortions through reduced competition, increased market entry barriers, and innovation anti-commons, particularly in the pharmaceutical industry. The paper documents how these practices directly impact healthcare accessibility through increased medical costs, delayed generic alternatives, and misaligned research priorities that disproportionately affect vulnerable populations. After examining contributing factors including defensive patenting strategies, broad claim language, low-quality applications, and insufficient USPTO resources, the paper proposes a multi-faceted reform approach combining stricter patentability criteria, enhanced examination protocols, AI-powered analysis tools, potential compulsory licensing for essential medicines, and alternative reward systems that better balance innovation incentives with broader social welfare considerations, concluding that without such reforms, the patent system risks transformation from an innovation catalyst into an innovation barrier.

First Page

287

Recommended Citation

Austin Talir, Patent Paradox: When Protection Becomes Proliferation, 9 Bus. Entrepreneurship & Tax L. Rev. 287 (2025).
Available at: https://scholarship.law.missouri.edu/betr/vol9/iss2/12