U.S. patents can indeed impact global innovation in several ways. How they might hinder innovation around the world
:
1. Blocking access to key technologies, 2. Patent thickets and over-patenting, 3. High cost of licensing and litigation, 4. Extension of patent protections through trade agreements, 5. Limiting reverse engineering and local adaptation, 6. Concentration of innovation in wealthy countries.
However, patents can also stimulate innovation by providing incentives for R\&D—so their impact depends on how they’re used and balanced.
In software industry U.S. patents can hinder global innovation in some unique ways, like 1. Patenting abstract ideas, 2. Patent trolls (non-practicing entities), 3. Inhibiting open-source development, 4. Global chilling effect, 5. Interoperability restrictions, 6. Barrier to localization
In contrast, some countries (like much of Europe) place stricter limits on what software can be patented, focusing more on technical effects rather than abstract ideas. The broader scope of U.S. software patents therefore imposes *extra global constraints*.
It needs to point out how U.S. policies on *competitive company law* and *patent law* (including incentives like strong protections and moratorium periods) helped attract global inventors, fueling innovation and industrial growth. Likewise, Japan, Korea, and China strategically navigated around restrictive patents, using incremental innovation and legal loopholes to build their industries.
So why hasn’t *Bangladesh* followed a similar path? There are several constrains some of them are:
1. *Lack of strong industrial policy: Japan, Korea, and China had **state-driven industrial strategies* that deliberately targeted specific sectors for growth (e.g., electronics, automotive, heavy industry) and provided coordinated support—something Bangladesh has largely lacked beyond the garment sector.
2. *Weak R\&D investment: Those countries invested heavily in **research and development (R\&D)*, technical education, and technology transfer mechanisms, allowing local firms to absorb and improve upon foreign technologies. Bangladesh’s R\&D spending remains below 0.5% of GDP, far behind global innovation leaders.
3. *Limited technological base*: Countries like Korea and China already had stronger industrial and technological foundations when they began their catch-up efforts. Bangladesh’s economy is still dominated by low-tech manufacturing, making it harder to leapfrog into high-tech sectors that challenge patents.
4. *Policy and institutional gaps: Japan, Korea, and China developed **national intellectual property strategies* to systematically identify patents to design around or license, while also encouraging local patenting. Bangladesh lacks a similar institutional framework to guide companies in navigating or circumventing global IP barriers.
5. *Focus on export-driven low-cost production: Bangladesh’s economic model has prioritized **low-wage, labor-intensive exports (mainly garments)* rather than technology-intensive industries. This limits both the need and capacity to engage deeply with global patent landscapes.
6. *Regulatory and bureaucratic challenges*: Businesses in Bangladesh often face regulatory inefficiencies, infrastructure problems which comes from lack of government vision, that discourage higher-risk innovation activities compared to manufacturing under existing models.
7. *No strong local champions or conglomerates in tech*: Korea had chaebols like Samsung and Hyundai; Japan had giants like Sony and Toyota; China had state-owned enterprises and later tech giants like Huawei. Bangladesh hasn’t developed similar large-scale firms capable of investing in R\&D and navigating international IP.
In short, it’s not only about *changing designs to bypass patents*—it’s about having an ecosystem (policy, capital, technical skill, legal strategy) that supports that effort.
Bangladesh has an opportunity to learn from these models, especially as it looks to diversify beyond garments. What sector do you think Bangladesh should target next for this kind of innovation-driven growth?
Source: Collected...
