Brad Watts
Vice President, Patents and Innovation Policy, Global Innovation Policy Center (GIPC), U.S. Chamber of Commerce
Published
December 02, 2024
Each year, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce celebrates leaders who rely on IP protection to advance cultural, scientific, and technological solutions to the world’s leading challenges. The Chamber's Global IP Champions event recognizes those who constantly demonstrate leadership, ingenuity, and creativity in pursuing strong intellectual property rights and brings together the visionaries in innovation and creativity who create jobs, underpin economic growth, and enhance our shared competitiveness.
In the lead up to this year's event, the Global Innovation Policy Center (GIPC) is spotlighting awardees in a series of conversations about the impact of IP protection on their organizations, the intellectual property landscape, and their predictions for the future.
For this installment, I sat down with Rep. Kevin Kiley (R-CA), who shares his thoughts on the IP landscape in the hill, strengthening IP protections in the 119th Congress, and how the private and public sectors can collaborate to foster innovation and creativity.
What inspired you to become an intellectual property rights champion in Congress?
My time in private practice as a patent attorney led me to this. After graduating from law school, I went to work at Irell. Andrei Iancu, President Trump’s USPTO Director, hired me, and we’ve been in touch ever since. During my time there, I fought for American companies against IP theft. Intellectual property is necessary for innovation, and companies that have their own patents and copyrights grow faster and employ more people than businesses that do not.
What sparked this passion?
When I was at Irell, I saw the damage caused by a weakening intellectual property system. IP creates jobs and drives innovation. If protections continue to wane, the economy will slow, and our rivals will overtake us. Strong intellectual property protections are a pilar of every healthy economy.
In your view, what is one key policy change the United States could implement to foster greater innovation and creativity?
Patent subject matter eligibility is quite muddled right now. It is convoluted and variable depending on which judge evaluates each patent when challenged. This disincentivizes inventors from trying to patent creations, leading them to keep their inventions as trade secrets, which do not foster innovation since their details are private, unlike patents. Since SCOTUS has denied over 100 appeals on subject matter eligibility, the judiciary is not going to solve this matter for us. Congress needs to enact a law that makes subject matter eligibility crystal clear.
As we look ahead to the 119th Congress, what are your plans to strengthen IP rights? Are there any specific pieces of legislation you are considering sponsoring?
As you could probably guess based on my answer to your previous question, I will continue to work on PERA. I partnered with Rep. Scott Peters, a Democrat from the San Diego area, to introduce this. Sens. Coons and Tillis, another bipartisan duo in the Senate, are leading the charge on the other side of the capitol. PERA would fix confusing rulings from SCOTUS by creating explicit categories for inventions that are not subject matter eligible and allow everything else to be considered subject matter eligible. Right now, most medical diagnostics, gene therapies, and software are ineligible based on subject matter. PERA would fix this. Additionally, PERA would protect inventions made using AI. The bill clarifies that the way an invention is made shall not be used to render its subject matter ineligible. Given the increasing prevalence of AI in the economy, we need to make sure AI isn’t used as an excuse to deny or infringe on patents. If we allow this to happen, we will gravely handicap ourselves and let other countries, such as China, pull ahead.
How can private sector voices collaborate more effectively with the government and your office to promote robust intellectual property rights?
Private industry stakeholders should try to meet with officeholders and explain exactly what economic benefits strong IP protections mean to their constituents. Talk about jobs and investment. Talk about technological innovation. These are things every politician knows and cares about. Talking about the philosophical reasons for strong IP protections works for some people, but discussing the material benefits will actually convince those who don’t spend their time pondering patent subject matter eligibility.
About the authors
Brad Watts
Brad Watts is the Vice President for Patents and Innovation Policy at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's Global Innovation Policy Center (GIPC). He works with U.S. Chamber members to foster a political, legal, and economic environment where innovators and creators can invest in the next big thing for the benefit of Americans and the world.
