"Invention companies that rely on patent-licensing fees are outnumbered and outgunned in lobbying by the companies selling products that are in high demand because of the valuable technologies inside them. "
TheHill has commentary related in part to non-practising entities (NPEs):
Meanwhile, policy discussions have focused on theories, promoted by parties that would profit from lower patent licensing fees, of alleged patent hold-up and royalty stacking -- which suggest patent holders can charge excessive royalties – despite the utter lack of evidence offered by proponents of these theories. To the contrary, there is abundant evidence showing the smartphone market is open, competitive, accelerating with innovation and technology adoption, and increasingly cost effective for consumers. Unsurprisingly, no party seeking to reduce its royalty costs has yet tried to prove in court the total amount of the alleged smartphone “royalty stack,” or more importantly, that the total amount of royalties they pay to use technologies they did not invent is “excessive.”
Antitrust agencies should resist pressures from vested interests to regulate the market in favor of one business model over another. Invention companies that rely on patent-licensing fees are outnumbered and outgunned in lobbying by the companies selling products that are in high demand because of the valuable technologies inside them. If this free-market economic balance shifts to favor short-term profits of technology implementers over long-term innovation, consumers will be the biggest losers.