Apply an advertising word: Although "patent" is good, don't be greedy-after all, "patent" is not a black child, but it is basically related to GDP, core technology ownership rate and related scientific research indicators. Although the "world's number one" hat looks good, it is also dangerous to wear it indiscriminately. Although China National Intellectual Property Administration responded that "the news that the proportion of junk patents in China exceeds 50% is seriously against the facts", our "junk patents" are obviously very ill.
There are three factors that make our number of patent applications "the first in the world":
First, the "patent concept" with China characteristics. The "patent" in China's patent law includes invention patent, utility model patent and design patent, but in Europe and America, the latter two are generally not called patents and are not applicable to patent law. Our "junk patents" are obviously more bred in the two lower-level fields of "appearance and novelty";
Second, the patent examination system is full of rent-seeking loopholes. Invention patents are actually examined, while utility model and design patents are only "formal examination", which only depends on procedural justice, regardless of whether the content has operational value or not and whether the patent has been taken-virtual examination brings "information asymmetry". Therefore, the dispute between utility model and design is almost normal. As for the original intention of saving administrative costs in theory, it is buried in the endless disputes of enterprises;
The third is "digital patentism" in the series of "digital achievement view". The subsidy policies of scientific research units and local governments to encourage patent applications are thoroughly quantified, and "quantity" is used to get "money". It has long been an open secret that the patent application has been alienated into a "horse race" game.