P2P Foundation

The Las Indias “Indianopedia” english article on Devolutionism writes:

Devolutionism is the defense of the progressive legal reduction -until its total disappearing- of the economic monopoly for patents, copyrights and other intellectual property forms, expanding the public domain with the creations of the last decades. Devolutionism has won its theoretical maturity with the works of Boldrin and Levin (2000)[1] and its empirical with Heidi Williams studies on human genome patents[2]. The result of research is clear: IP is counterproductive to innovation, its original goal).

Indeed, the Heidi Williamst study concludes without a shadow of a doubt:

Celera’s IP led to reductions in subsequent scientific research and product development outcomes on the order of 30 percent. Celera’s short-term IP thus appears to have had persistent negative effects on subsequent innovation relative to a counterfactual of Celera genes having always been in the public domain.

More info on the paper:

* Paper: Intellectual property rights and innovation: Evidence from the human genome. By Heidi Williams†. December 30, 2009

“This paper provides empirical evidence on how intellectual property (IP) on a given technology affects subsequent innovation. To shed light on this question, I analyze the sequencing of the human genome by the public Human Genome Project and the private firm Celera, and estimate the impact of Celera’s gene-level IP on subsequent scientific research and product development outcomes. Celera’s IP ap- plied to genes sequenced first by Celera, and was removed when the public effort re-sequenced those genes. I test whether genes that ever had Celera’s IP differ in subsequent innovation, as of 2009, from genes sequenced by the public effort over the same time period, a comparison group that appears balanced on ex ante gene- level observables. A complementary panel analysis traces the effects of removal of Celera’s IP on within-gene flow measures of subsequent innovation. Both analyses suggest – Celera’s IP led to reductions in subsequent scientific research and product development outcomes on the order of 30 percent. Celera’s short-term IP thus appears to have had persistent negative effects on subsequent innovation relative to a counterfactual of Celera genes having always been in the public domain.”