February Highlights: Debunking Patent Myths With Our New Video Series
In recent months, anti-patent activists have continued to spread false narratives about patent rights, claiming that companies abuse the patent system to stifle competition. To counter these common myths, C4IP launched a Patent Myth Video Series to provide brief and accessible explanations of how patents actually work — and educate viewers on the vital role they play in promoting, rather than hindering, innovation.
Throughout the past month, C4IP released the first six videos in the series, with one more on the way soon:
- C4IP Patent Myth Video Series: C4IP Co-Chairs and former USPTO Directors David Kappos and Andrei Iancu introduce the video series by explaining the critical role that patents play in driving U.S. innovation and economic growth.
- C4IP Patent Myth Video Series: Introduction: This video highlights and debunks several false claims often made by opponents of patents, such as the idea that patent owners “game the system” or that patents stifle competition in the medical and communications industries.
- C4IP Patent Myth Video Series: Royalty Stacking: This video dives into the myth of “royalty stacking” — the claim that owners of standard-essential patents (SEPs) charge too much for patent licenses — and explains why SEP licenses are both fair and necessary for high-tech innovation.
- C4IP Patent Myth Video Series: Evergreening: This video disproves the narrative that companies unfairly extend their patent terms by filing unnecessary follow-on patents, explaining that new patents are only issued for new inventions.
- C4IP Patent Myth Video Series: Product Hopping: This video discredits the narrative that companies improve medications to keep prices high, explaining that continuous advancements — like reducing dosing frequency, or minimizing side effects — are crucial innovations that benefit patients.
- C4IP Patent Myth Video Series: Patent Thickets: This video debunks the claim that multiple patents on a single product create a “patent thicket,” explaining that each patented innovation, like those in smartphone cameras, is essential for technological progress and investment.
Additional Coalition Updates
-
- On March 4, C4IP Co-Chairs Andrei Iancu and David Kappos published an opinion essay in The Hill explaining how, by passing the RESTORE Patent Rights Act without delay, lawmakers can bring common sense fairness back to our nation’s patent system.
- On March 4, C4IP Executive Director Frank Cullen issued a statement applauding the USPTO’s rescission of a 2022 memorandum that limited certain discretionary denials of institution at the PTAB.
- On March 3, C4IP sent a letter to the House Ways & Means Subcommittee on Trade urging Congress to exercise its oversight authority to ensure that USTR fulfills its congressional mandate in the upcoming Special 301 Report.
- On March 3, C4IP Board Member Judge Paul Michel (ret.) joined an IPWatchdog panel to discuss the new administration, patent reform in Congress, and IP priorities in 2025! Click here for more information on the event.
- On February 27, C4IP Chief Counsel and Policy Officer Jamie Simpson published an opinion essay in The Engage Reader underscoring how the PREVAIL Act, IDEA Act, and the RESTORE Patent Rights Act would encourage inventors of all backgrounds to develop and commercialize their innovations, knowing that their intellectual property is secure.
- On February 25, C4IP released a statement applauding Senators Chris Coons (D-DE) and Tom Cotton (R-AR), as well as Representatives Nathaniel Moran (R-TX) and Madeleine Dean (D-PA) for reintroducing the bipartisan Realizing Engineering, Science, and Technology Opportunities by Restoring Exclusive (RESTORE) Patent Rights Act.
- C4IP’s statement was featured in Law360 and IPWatchdog articles covering RESTORE’s reintroduction.
- On February 19, C4IP Executive Director Frank Cullen sent a letter to President Trump and his administration, congratulating them on the inauguration and emphasizing the crucial role of strong intellectual property protections in our innovation economy.
“Our organization shares many common goals with your administration, such as promoting new technologies, encouraging small business success, and upholding U.S. economic and job growth. Decisions made by your administration concerning intellectual property will be fundamental to meeting these objectives.”
- On February 19, C4IP issued a statement applauding the Senate confirmation of Howard Lutnick, a longtime innovation advocate and patent holder, as the new Secretary of Commerce.
-
- C4IP’s statement was quoted in an IPWatchdog article about the appointment of Will Covey as Acting Deputy Director of the USPTO under Lutnick’s leadership.
-
- On February 18, C4IP Board Member Judge Paul Michel (ret.) published an opinion essay in the International Business Times explaining why overcoming China’s technological advantages will require America to initiate comprehensive innovation reforms founded on strong IP.
“America faces a crisis. In effect, we need a crash recovery program to revive our tech sector, with special focus on our small, innovative businesses — what legendary venture capitalists like Marc Andreessen have dubbed ‘Little Tech.'”
- On February 12, C4IP Executive Director Frank Cullen issued a statement celebrating the European Commission’s decision to withdraw proposed regulations on standard-essential patents (SEPs), which would have threatened innovation across Europe and the United States.
- C4IP’s statement was quoted in an IPWatchdog article capturing the IP community’s reaction to the decision.
- On February 11, C4IP announced the creation of its Advisory Board, which consists of highly regarded intellectual property experts: Etienne Sanz de Acedo, F. Scott Kieff, Keith Kupferschmid, Steven Caltrider, Stephen Susalka, Walter Copan, and — as of February 27 — Laura Peter.
- C4IP’s Advisory Board was featured in a news roundup in IPWatchdog.
- On February 10, C4IP Co-Chair David Kappos published an opinion essay in Law360 debunking the false narrative that “patent thicketing” and “evergreening” are widespread and a barrier to innovation.
- On February 5, C4IP Co-Chair Andrei Iancu was featured in an episode of Understanding IP Matters, a podcast hosted by IPWatchdog’s Bruce Berman, in which he discussed the current IP challenges facing the Trump administration and the importance of PERA, PREVAIL, and RESTORE.
- On February 3, C4IP Executive Director Frank Cullen issued a statement applauding the Foreign Anti-Digital Piracy Act (FADPA) introduced by Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), which would empower U.S. courts to block foreign websites that enable IP theft.
- C4IP’s statement was quoted in a Forbes article about the bill.
- On February 1, C4IP Board Member Judge Kathleen O’Malley (ret.) published an opinion essay in IAM fact-checking key claims made about Bayh-Dole Act march-in rights and Section 1498 in a recent debate between C4IP Co-Chair David Kappos and Harvard Medical School professor Aaron Kesselheim.
- On January 29, C4IP Co-Chairs Andrei Iancu and David Kappos published an opinion essay in the Stanford Social Innovation Review about why protecting human creativity with IP is crucial to harnessing the full potential of artificial intelligence.
“To unlock AI’s transformative potential across fields, we must incentivize the human creativity that fuels it. Strong IP protections are key to this process.”
- On January 28, C4IP published a blog post examining the key conclusions from the USPTO’s Drug Patent and Exclusivity Study and evaluating how the study’s findings disprove common anti-patent myths.
- ICYMI: C4IP is now on Bluesky! Follow @council4ip.bsky.social for the latest updates, insights, and discussions on intellectual property and innovation.
Government Rundown
House Small Business Committee Hearing: Fostering American Innovation: Insights into SBIR and STTR Programs:
On February 26, the House Small Business Committee held a hearing to discuss how the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) and Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) programs bolster U.S. innovation. The programs award funding grants to small businesses to help them develop and commercialize early-stage technologies. (House Small Business Committee, 2/26)
Senate and House of Representatives, Reintroduction of RESTORE Patent Rights Act:
On February 25, Senators Chris Coons (D-DE) and Tom Cotton (R-AR), along with Representatives Nathaniel Moran (R-TX) and Madeleine Dean (D-PA), reintroduced the RESTORE Patent Rights Act in both the Senate and the House of Representatives. This bipartisan, bicameral legislation aims to strengthen patent protections by restoring the presumption of injunctive relief for patent holders, effectively countering the limitations imposed by the Supreme Court’s 2006 eBay v. MercExchange decision. The bill seeks to deter intellectual property theft and bolster American innovation by ensuring that inventors can obtain court orders to prohibit unauthorized use of their patented technologies. (Senate and House of Representatives, 2/25)
Confirmation of Howard Lutnick as Secretary of Commerce:
On February 18, the Senate voted 51-45 to confirm the appointment of Howard Lutnick, a longtime innovation advocate and patent holder, as the new Secretary of Commerce. C4IP issued a statement applauding Lutnick’s confirmation and outlining how he can drive economic growth by embracing IP. (Commerce Department, 2/18)
House Energy & Commerce Committee, Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade Hearing: AI in Manufacturing: Securing American Leadership in Manufacturing and the Next Generation of Technologies:
On February 12, the House Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade held a hearing on the role emerging technologies like AI can play in revitalizing U.S. manufacturing. It featured witnesses representing Siemens Corporation, the Information Technology Industry Council, Autodesk, and Massachusetts Institute of Technology. (House Energy & Commerce Committee, 2/12)
Fact Check
Discussions about China’s treatment of intellectual property have recently intensified in Washington, with some policymakers weighing more drastic measures to counteract perceived abuses. While concerns about China’s approach to IP are justified, some commonly repeated claims mischaracterize the problem — potentially leading to policy decisions that could backfire on American innovators.
As policymakers consider responses to these challenges, it’s critical to ground the discussion in accurate information and strategic policymaking. That’s why we’re taking a closer look at widely circulated claims about China’s IP practices to ensure that U.S. policy responses are fact-based, effective, and supportive of American innovation:
| Claim: China denies U.S. innovators patent protection while exploiting the U.S. patent system against American companies. |
| In reality: U.S. companies can and do receive patents in China — in 2023, nearly 50,900 patent applications were filed in China by U.S. innovators. However, that isn’t to say that these patent rights are strong and reliable. China’s judicial system is often opaque, and critical legal decisions regarding patents are not regularly published. This makes it difficult for companies to predict how their patents will be treated in court and gives the Chinese government plausible deniability to excuse domestic companies accused of IP infringement.
The distinction between not granting patents and granting ones that cannot be effectively enforced is critical. Instead of framing the issues as a blanket denial of U.S. patents, policymakers should focus on demanding greater transparency and accountability in China’s IP enforcement system and on seeking justice for American businesses who are not fairly treated in Chinese courts. Strengthening U.S. competitiveness requires targeted solutions to not risk retaliation against American firms. |
| Claim: China abuses the U.S. patent system, and we should reciprocate by restricting their access. |
| In reality: While Chinese firms do obtain many U.S. patents, this does not mean that the U.S. patent system is being weaponized against American companies. According to recent research from the Sunwater Institute, the United States has one of the lowest rates of wrongly granted patents in the world, indicating that we already do well at getting foreign innovators to play by our rules.
Our existing patent system and strong enforcement practices have been hugely beneficial to our nation’s economy, powering our historic global leadership in innovation. Weakening these protections in an effort to mirror China’s restrictive policies would ultimately harm American inventors, leaving them with less protection and worse treatment in global markets. Instead of eroding our own system, we should demand that China’s system becomes as transparent as the United States and treats all rights holders equally,ensuring that American innovators continue to benefit from strong patent protections both at home and abroad. |
| Claim: China’s economic success is built in no small part on stolen U.S. intellectual property. |
| In reality: This is true: China’s track record of stealing American IP is real, extensive, and well-documented. According to the FBI, Chinese IP theft is estimated to cost the U.S. economy up to $600 billion per year. China also regularly features on the U.S. Trade Representative’s annual Special 301 Report and Notorious Markets Report for engaging in anti-IP practices such as forced technology transfer and counterfeiting.
Protecting U.S. businesses from Chinese IP theft is a critical priority for policymakers. However, the severity of this threat makes it even more important for the U.S. to pursue carefully designed, strategic responses. Overly broad restrictions could lead to unintended consequences, such as retaliation against U.S. companies abroad or the weakening of key international IP agreements that benefit American innovators. |
By ensuring that U.S. policies are factually and strategically sound, lawmakers can better protect American innovation while maintaining the country’s leadership in the global intellectual property landscape. Thoughtful, well-crafted approaches will be key to safeguarding U.S. businesses, fostering innovation, and strengthening international IP protections.
Celebrating American Innovation
Inventor Spotlight
This month, C4IP is recognizing John R. Pierce (1910-2002), the visionary engineer whose work on communications satellites paved the way for global connectivity.
- Pierce’s early fascination with electronics and radio waves led him from his hometown of Des Moines, Iowa, to Caltech and then to Bell Labs, where he spent over 35 years as a prolific inventor in the field of communications.
- Pierce patented his groundbreaking discoveries in satellite communication in 1955, directly enabling the launch of Telstar 1 — the first active communications satellite — in 1962.
- During his career, Pierce received over 90 patents and was awarded the National Medal of Science.
- His invention paved the way for the more than 11,000 satellites orbiting Earth today, which enable a wide range of services including telecommunications, broadcasting, and data communications.
- The commercial satellite industry is worth over $280 billion as of 2024, with U.S. firms building the vast majority of new satellites launched each year.
- The satellites Pierce pioneered play an unseen yet vital role in our daily lives: An estimated 92 million phones are equipped with satellite communications, while 30 million cars are expected to incorporate the technology by 2034.
(Photo credit: National Academy of Engineering)
What’s Happening in Congress
With the 119th Congress underway, Democratic and Republican lawmakers are weighing legislation to prioritize. For those following intellectual property policy, top of mind the potential reintroduction of two significant bills from the previous Congress — alongside the recent reintroduction of the RESTORE Patent Rights Act — all of which address key patent system challenges:
The Patent Eligibility Restoration Act (PERA), which would revitalize innovation and investment in crucial high-tech sectors by reversing arbitrary, judicially created exceptions to patent eligibility.
The Promoting and Respecting Economically Vital American Innovation Leadership (PREVAIL) Act, which would level the legal playing field for small inventors and give them a fair chance to defend their patents from theft by larger competitors.
The Realizing Engineering, Science, and Technology Opportunities by Restoring Exclusive (RESTORE) Patent Rights Act, which was recently reintroduced in both the House and Senate. This bipartisan, bicameral legislation would reestablish injunctive relief as the primary legal remedy for patent infringement, reaffirming innovators’ constitutional rights to the exclusive ownership of their inventions.
We will continue to track movement on these bills and provide updates on legislative developments in upcoming editions. In the interim, you can find resources on these key issues here.