Yesterday, I wrote about the ridiculous Department of Commerce / U.S. Patent and Trademark Office "study" to demonstrate how "jobs" was in "IP-intensive" industries. Among the many problems with the report defines how IP-intensive industries, with the top on the list to be .... grocery stores. In fact, most of the "Best Companies to Work for" in the list are the industries that - although they may find useful the intellectual property laws to end consumer confusion about brands - not at all dependent aa on the intellectual property rights. In fact, the only "big" areas that would normally think it is "IP-intensive" was "computer systems and drawings," which includes most businesses and individuals fighting hard

against

expansion of copyright and patents.

Yet the entertainment industry and government officials were bring out the great "work" in this report as evidence that we need laws to expand intellectual property agreements such as the IAD and ACTA.

I mentioned in yesterday's post, before this report came out, had reached the White House to say that they knew I was interested in this type of information, and I asked if I wanted to interview the "economic experts" behind the report. I said I love you to interview experts. I passed along a spokesman for the Department of Commerce, who asked me to submit questions to the advance before I can question experts "economic." I always find this kind of configuration to be a little ridiculous. one I interview people, or not. Do not do it before sending your questions.



Anyway, I was in the middle of a heavy travel schedule, and I took a few weeks to have time to go through the report more carefully , and a list of questions, which eventually sent. spokesman seemed confused to still be interested in this report and it was used repeatedly by the leaders of the entertainment industry and government representatives to justify bad policies. After following a couple of times, I was told yesterday morning that they were "unable to answer an interview" (remember,

that came aa I

first), but I got the following "statement".

All indications are that patents continue to drive innovation in technology. At the time of his death, innovator, Steve Jobs, had over 300 patents. Companies like Apple has made transformational changes in our lives, made possible by massive investment in intellectual property. However, if these companies to develop new technologies and services, which also perform incremental innovation. Therefore, intellectual property disputes arise as by-products of a very healthy environment for innovation in general. The technology sector is characterized by sharp decreases in costs over time, large increases in performance and changes in multiple markets led, with different leaders in different time points. This highly competitive market, is a sign of intellectual property rights on the critical role in leading technology companies to invest, competition, create jobs and exports of the unit.

At the methodological question:

The report focused on the identification of IP "IP industries intensive and review their characteristics and contributions. the global economy "One measure of the contribution of these industries in the global economy is the number of jobs in these industries, we have seen other measures are value added, wages earned by workers in these industries and exports.



As I said yesterday, this statement is so ridiculous that I sent them the spokesman for the back and said that while a statement like this is a
gold mine in terms of being able to write a history of

Find best price for : --Jobs----Steve--