Peter Harter

What’s really holding America back in the biopharma race against China isn’t just Beijing’s subsidies or cheaper labor. It’s the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit’s self-inflicted wound: a court so panel-dependent that no one—brand or generic—knows which rule will apply until the panel is drawn. The Supreme Court can fix this in one stroke by granting certiorari in MSN Pharmaceuticals v. Novartis (No. 25-225) and killing the bizarre “after-arising technology” exception that lets old, vague patents swallow future inventions.

Howard Lutnick has been universally criticized by industry for his reported proposal to tax patent values and revenue share with universities. Howard Lutnick is absolutely right about the problem. Here’s why. The patent system was designed for individual inventors. Thomas Edison, the Wright brothers—these were lone entrepreneurs securing temporary monopoly rights in exchange for disclosing their inventions to the public. But sometime after World War II, corporations and universities completed a quiet takeover of the patent office. Today’s patent landscape is dominated by patent oligarchs: systematic corporate R&D programs filing thousands of applications annually, not individuals pursuing personal innovation.

H.R.1, the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” (OBBBA), passed the House on May 22, 2025. Congress.gov provides a Summary of this mammoth piece of legislation: “This bill reduces taxes, reduces or increases spending for various federal programs, increases the statutory debt limit, and otherwise addresses agencies and programs throughout the federal government. It is known as a reconciliation bill and includes legislation submitted by 11 House committees pursuant to provisions in the FY2025 congressional budget resolution (H Con. Res. 14) that directed the committees to submit legislation to the House Budget Committee that will increase or decrease the deficit and increase the statutory debt limit by specified amounts.

China is more relevant than ever before and should drive much of what Trump 2.0 does on patents and critical technologies such as EVs, batteries and communications, all crucial to America’s economic and national security. This op-ed follows up on my coverage of then candidate Trump in 2016, which focused on his intersection of China and patents.

The Wall Street Journal explains ithat the Silicon Valley culture has long regarded copying as a good thing and necessary for rapid growth, first to market, first mover advantage, network effects, world domination, liquidity for early investors and Founders, etc. What complete and total garbage. When you live in a culture that tolerates and even promotes copying that is, in fact, what you get. When everyone copies everyone that means no one is innovating. Many studies and articles in recent years have highlighted how we have a net loss of startups over the past 30 years and that companies are no longer innovating.