“We have the judgement in the latest installment of the Apple v. Samsung case and there’s one little detail that shows why we need to change the patent system as it works: or rather, as it fails to work,” Tim Worstall writes for Forbes.

“So, Apple wins on some patents, loses on another, the overall award being much less than they had sought but still just under $200 million. So, justice done, right?” Worstall writes. “Ah, no, not quite so quickly: “‘Though this verdict is large by normal standards, it is hard to view this outcome as much of a victory for Apple. This amount is less than 10% of the amount Apple requested, and probably doesn’t surpass by too much the amount Apple spent litigating this case,’ said Brian Love, assistant professor at the Santa Clara University law school.” If you’ve got to pay out in lawyers’ fees approximately what you win in damages then that’s not really all that much of a victory, is it?”

“That you must spend near $200 million to gain a righteous $200 million verdict seems absurd. And also that you can threaten to cause $2 million of costs for a $20,000 award. The solution to both is to move, at least, the patent system to one where the loser pays all legal fees. The Supreme Court last week decided that it is now a little easier for a judge to insist on so awarding costs: but it should, perhaps, become the default position, not something offered only in exceptional circumstances,” Worstall writes. “It is the way that the English system works, it’s the model that has been chosen for the new European Union patent courts and it makes sense that the US adopts the same model. There’s even a law before Congress to take us a lot of the way there, the Innovation Act from Rep Goodlatte [R-VA 6th District].”

Worstall writes, “Whether or not this is good politics is for others to judge, not me. But it’s a lot better economics than we have in the system currently.”

Read more in the full article here.

[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “David E.” for the heads up.]

Related articles:
Apple latest patent infringement win against Samsung, could be worth more than $360 million when finalized – May 3, 2014
Apple v. Samsung II damages breakdown revealed in jury verdict form – May 3, 2014
After seeking $2 billion, jury awards Apple just $120 million over Samsung’s infringement of two patents – May 2, 2014
Slap on the wrist: Samsung’s damages for infringing Apple’s patents equivalent to 16 days’ profit – January 25, 2014