The Association of Government Accountants (formerly the "Federal Government Accountants Association") has awarded the US Patent and Trademark Office its "Fiscal Year 2007 Performance and Accountability Report Award" (which looks oddly similar to the USPTO's own "red ribbon" patent grant) one of 17 federal agencies to get this award that year.

Not only does the USPTO prepare "a well structured, logically organized and easy-to-navigate report" it's very "productive" too. As it boasts on its website,

Highlights of USPTO accomplishments for the past year include ... Increased patent production by an additional 14 percent over 2007 by examining 448,003 applications the highest number in our history. Production has increased by 38.6 percent over the past four years, compared to a 21.3 percent increase in application filings during the same period.

It's sobering to think how much worse off the US would be in this recession without all this productivity.

For some more interesting patent statistics, see the World Patent Report: A Statistical Review (2008) for example, as of about 2006, there were about two million patent applications filed per years worldwide; about 750,000 patents issued (granted) every year; and about 6.1 million patents in force around the world.

(cross-posted at Mises.org)

It's sobering to think how much worse off the US would be in this recession without all this productivity.

Actually, the net effect would be minimal, if any. Patent applicants pay for the patent process, and the amount is relatively insignificant compared to all other business expenses. Further, the value of a patent application is considered when budgeting for such things, so hopefully only the most valuable inventions are receiving patent protection.

On the other hand, U.S. business could save a mint if they could eliminate Sarbanes Oxley, which does real damage to business and the economy.

Lonnie strikes again!

"so hopefully only the most valuable inventions are receiving patent protection."

Yes, such "valuable inventions" as the one-click shopping cart, "method of exercising a cat" with a laser pointer, and so forth.

My personal favorite being "mechanism for hindering competition, suppressing disruptive technologies, preserving one's present business model and market share in amber, and extorting money from rivals, by obtaining and exploiting government granted mercantile privilege", with a diagram showing lobbyists, arrows, dollar signs, and the White House; pat. pending but sure to issue any day now.

Beeswax:

My favorite is "Self lobotomy caused by making up facts on the spot." I am looking forward to your award for that one.

"[insults deleted]"

None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at all true.

You win the rather dubious award titled Heavyweight Champ, Ad Hominem Divison. Enjoy!

(The patents I referenced can all be found to exist using some quick Google searches. The one-click patent has, I think, been overturned recently, at great legal expense and volunteer effort thanks in large part to the EFF, but not before causing bull-in-a-china-shop levels of damage.)

Beeswax:

Somehow you manage to turn everything into an accuasation of an ad hominem attack, which you then turn around and do yourself.

In any case, as far as I can tell, some claims (not the entire patent) in the so-called one-click patent were overturned in a re-examination requested by Peter Braden Calveley. I was unable to see an EFF connection there. Here are some links for you:

http://www.realityprime.com/news/amazon-one-click-patent-overturned

http://techdirt.com/articles/20060515/0130246.shtml

You again.

"[insults deleted] In any case, as far as I can tell, some claims (not the entire patent) in the so-called one-click patent were overturned in a re-examination requested by Peter Braden Calveley. I was unable to see an EFF connection there."

None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at all true.

The latest news I'd heard was that the whole patent was invalidated. I think all the claims were invalidated, some new ones were added, and then those were invalidated later on. The EFF connection is that it was the EFF's patent-busting project's #1 target.

Beeswax, my personal stalker.

So, because EFF had this patent on a list, EFF was involved somehow, in your words: "...at great legal expense and volunteer effort thanks in large part to the EFF." So, was it on a list (unimportant), or did they do something (important)? I am unable to see the link that you clearly stated existed.

Lonnie, our pet troll, wrote:

"Beeswax, my [insult deleted]."

No. None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at all true.

"So, because EFF had this patent on a list, EFF was involved somehow"

Yes, they encouraged people to try to get this patent yanked. And it worked.

"I am unable to see the link that you clearly stated existed."

As I stated in another post, you will be able to once you have a set of eyeglasses with the correct prescription. Until you do, though, you'll continue to see very little except blurs.

Actually, the gentleman in Australia was apparently unaware of EFF.

When are you going to stop following me from web site to web site, stalker?

Our resident troll writes:

"Actually, the gentleman in Australia was apparently unaware of EFF."

Apparently to you, perhaps. Maybe if you laid off the drugs, we could communicate coherently about the same real world that I'm actually living in.

"When are you going to stop following me from web site to web site, [insult deleted]?"

Actually, I was here first, and none of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at all true.