Necessity The Mother of Invention

BY Heather Greenfield
February 11, 2011

When it comes to innovation, people often think of a research lab as the setting for new inventions or perhaps more recently the college dorm room or garage. But a new study by scholars including noted technology innovation professor at MIT’s Sloan School of Management Eric von Hippel finds that most innovation is happening on kitchen tables and garage workbenches.

Some areas of research and innovation were more likely to come from consumers such as scientific instruments, which von Hippel estimates as having 77 percent of innovations coming from users.

Von Hippel’s study commissioned by the British government found over three years individual consumers spent twice as much making and improving products as all British companies combined spent on research and development. He’s now been asked to do similar studies by government authorities in Finland and Portugal, but he told the New York Times U.S. authorities didn’t seem as interested.

The study debunks the notion that innovation comes from Fortune 500 companies and offers examples how some large incumbents have a history of blocking innovation, even their own, so it didn’t compete with their current  revenue streams. – like AT&T suppressing wireless initially.

Just as more are producing user-created content (UCC) online, there are now numbers to show more innovation also comes from consumers – not producers. User-created innovation (UCI) further reinforces the need for patents reform.

There are similarities between  UCI and UCC on online media sites including blogs and social media sites. Both are collaborative, democratizing trends. The democratizing force of the Internet is not just in Egypt, but in marketplaces around the world. Allowing anti-democratic leaders and anti-competitive countries to suppress this force is not a feasible long- term plan for political or economic success.

The study adds to the evidence that IP rights are just one tool of many to promote innovation and that balance is needed so innovation is not suppressed.

UCI is happening for reasons entirely un-motivated by the incentive system that we currently have.  Those doing more innovating aren’t motivated by the desire for IP rights.  They’re motivated by necessity.  The mother of invention.  In other words, people invent because they need things, and giving out government-granted monopolies to incentivize creativity that is going to happen anyway is inefficient and wasteful.

Related Articles

Supreme Court Decides Landmark Google v. Oracle Case On Copyright, Interoperable Tech Products

Apr 5, 2021

Washington — The Supreme Court has issued its ruling in the Google v. Oracle copyright case, which has been litigated for more than a decade. The outcome, which has sweeping implications for the tech industry, means the reuse of certain program elements necessary for interoperability is fair use and not an infringement of copyright law.…

CCIA, Industry Groups File Complaint Against Maryland Digital Tax

Feb 18, 2021

Washington — The Computer & Communications Industry Association and a coalition of trade associations joined in filing a federal complaint against Maryland’s recent Act imposing a “Digital Advertising Gross Revenues Tax”, aimed at technology companies. The Act attempts to collect an estimated $250 million from a small number of companies in the first year, according…

Unvetted Copyright Measures In Spending Bill Concern CCIA

Dec 22, 2020

Washington — Congress has wrapped several controversial copyright measures into a must-pass end of the year spending bill.  The intellectual property part of the legislation includes the CASE Act, the Trademark Modernization Act, and the Protecting Lawful Streaming Act. While the Computer & Communications Industry Association doesn’t oppose the language of the streaming proposal, it…