Posted on 12/08/2005 11:07:42 PM PST by Congressman Billybob
Even today, sources on inventions list six by Franklin that are still in active use today. One of those sits in my back hall, cheerfully and economically heating the back of my home – the Franklin stove. Another sits on the bridge of my nose as I write this – a pair of bifocals. But this is about Franklin’s greatest invention, one that the lists never mention because it is mere words, not a physical object.
Franklin made seven trips to Europe, as a diplomat and scholar. He was welcomed into all the learned societies that existed in Europe then. One of the things he learned on those trips was that creative people were being cheated out of the financial benefits of their creations. When the novels of Charles Dickens became popular, printers other than his own simply reset the type and republished the books, without a cent in royalties to the author. When Thomas Paine’s design for a cast iron bridge became known (and remained the standard until the advent of the use of steel in the 20th century), others copied the design without a cent in royalties being paid.
Thomas Jefferson was undoubtedly the nation’s greatest political philosopher, in a group where the competition for that accolade was very high. But Franklin was the nation’s greatest practical philosopher. He recognized that the building of a nation required the creation of a form of fastest possible communication among its parts. So he created the first Post Office, and also served as the first Postmaster. Were Franklin to return, he would recognize in a trice how the Internet works and why it is important. On his second day back, he would have a blog entitled “Poor Richard’s Almanack.”
But even the Post Office, which led inexorably to the Internet, was not Franklin’s greatest invention. He thought about the problem of creative people being encouraged to develop new creations. He understood the importance of good, old-fashioned financial incentives. He suggested to James Madison the following 27-word clause to be added to the powers of Congress in Article I, Section 8. With little debate and no objection, since it came from the respected scientist, it was added to the Constitution:
“To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;....”
What is the importance of that clause? The US is only a small fraction of the world’s population. There are other, highly developed nations, with their own great universities. Still, more than three-fourths of all the world’s patents, copyrights, and trademarks are issued annually to Americans.
Is it because Americans are a special breed of human beings, better able to understand complexities and see the shape of the future? Comparisons of American students with their counterparts at all ages in other developed nations should quickly dispel that notion.
No, it is Franklin’s invention of this clause that has caused the explosion of American creativity, which began with the founding of the nation, and has shown no signs of slowing down in the two and a quarter centuries since. By giving a temporary monopoly to inventors like Thomas Edison and Bill Gates, it unleashed their abilities to redirect economic history. It unleashed the abilities of writers and creators like Mark Twain and Steven Spielberg to redirect literary and cinematic history.
(And one of the great diplomatic challenges of our times is to get certain nations to stop stealing the results of that creativity, by stealing the developments and reproducing them – exactly the way everyone was stealing all inventors’ works, when Franklin toured the learned societies of Europe, three centuries ago.)
Where did Franklin get the idea for this powerful clause, the one that is the engine behind the economic miracle of the United States of America? Every other clause in the Constitution has its progenitors in the works of Baron Montesquieu, John Locke, and other political and historical writers known to the Framers of the Constitution. This clause, and this one alone, has no ancestor.
Franklin saw the problem as it existed in the rest of the world. Franklin recognized that providing an economic incentive would encourage inventors and creators. And he also recognized that it must be temporary, “for limited times,” since he was aware of permanent monopolies such as the salt monopoly in the Ottoman empire, which were benefits for preferred supporters of the ruler.
In short, Franklin’s invention of this clause led to the current status of the American economy as the most powerful economic engine in history. And that is no small achievement.
About the Author: John Armor is a First Amendment attorney and author who lives in the Blue Ridge Mountains of North Carolina. John_Armor@aya.yale.edu
Excellent post. I even forgive the fact that the author is a lawyer.
(The short "modern" version.)
And there's no doubt that Silence Dogood, Martha Careful and Anthony Afterwit would all be very pleased at just such a development.
Thank you for another great article.
Congress is looking for ways to side-step intellectual property if the price is right. Some of them want to legitimize the exportation of drugs which is simply thievery of drug company patents.
Ben Franklin ping
...as I sit here in my bifocals (and pjs), being warmed by my Franklin stove, protected by my lightning rods...
ROFL! Go Ben, ya old dawg!
Several million people are alive today BECAUSE of patents and the incentives they provided for high-risk investments into R&D, plus maybe tens of millions who they lived to give birth to. Just the threat of patent revocation can scare away the funds for so many research projects that maybe the one that would have saved your child's life will never come to be. I'd sooner trust the scientists and doctors than the politicians (who'd be the ones making any final revocation decisions) any day anyway.
Thank you- I found it very interesting and just finished reading it to my 14 year old.
I believe he was the first to intuit that the charge in a Leyden jar remained on the glass container and proved it by statically charging the jar, dumping out its electrolyte and refilling to show that the cell remained fully charged until shorted to drain.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.