Comment Re:Really? (Score 0) 228
The patent system grants a limited monopoly in exchange for complete and enabling disclosure of an invention. It is this disclosure that promotes the useful arts, not the use of the underlying invention. In other words, patent policy does not care whether an inventor actually does anything with his patent. By the time the patent issues, the inventor has already paid his side of the quid-pro-quo.
The theory upon which this trade-off is justified is that if we don't give inventors an incentive to create and disclose their inventions, they will not do so. The limited monopoly purports to serve as this incentive under our current system. Other types of incentives have been suggested, such as prizes, research grants, subsidies, or tax deductions for R&D, but each comes fraught with its own suite of complications.
(Also, I mentioned the First Amendment argument because it comes up in law school discussions on this topic, not because I think it makes sense to me.)