I wonder if Europe is experiencing similar issues with the motivation system for its examiners. They could be pushed into demanding higher quality. However, compared to the drops in the U.S., the drops in Europe are not as staggering. Or the quality of patent applications is genuinely decreasing. The bigger issue as I see it is trying to determine if the decrease in patent rates is directly indicative of an environment where researchers feel stifled. If that is the case, at what point do the demands for high quality applications have a negative net impact on society rather than a positive one?

Response to Article 2: This is scary. The drug and biotech industries have a complex enough relationship with the legal system already, without adding fifty-one other jurisdictions into the mix. That the Supreme Court justices did not consider the vagueness of the "not strong enough" concept is also alarming. If this term is not defined,...

It's in Congress' hands now, to rewrite the laws. The system was not intended to work in this fashion. Moreover, how does this impact the marketing side of the equation? The decision to enter states will be taken on a case-by-case basis depending on their profitability. Vermont, incidentally, would be one of the states most hurt by this decision. States don't even have labeling approval processes, yet now they can allow juries to make up their own version of an adequate label, levying instant punishment of millions of dollars on the unknowing transgressor. For the industry, the prospect of fifty label approval processes in addition to FDA approval is a nightmare. And people wonder why treatment costs are going through the roof?