If you're already struggling financially, being forced to pony up 30% of this month's net revenue just to keep some public agency afloat so it can fine and fee more people later is the kind of bad break that kills people (https://www.thecut.com/2016/12/america-is-failing-the-bad-br...).
It's cruel and unjust and it has no place in America.
Because it creates an organization that deviates from its purported mission, abusing the public trust instead of serving a common need.
The self-funded USPTO has a bias toward approving bad patents to generate revenue and consequently enables the predatory behavior of NPEs. It becomes a net detriment to society.
If it rejected 99.9% of patents, the expected value of the typical application drops to 1/1000 its current value. So fewer people would pay the application fee.
Fewer patent clerks would be needed, so their operating costs would also decrease. But presumably not below 1/1000.
If it gets a reputation for being stricter on granting patents, a lot of people won't waste their time or money in submissions that are likely to be rejected.
> To understand some of the distrust of police that has fueled protests in Ferguson, Mo., consider this: In 2013, the municipal court in Ferguson — a city of 21,135 people — issued 32,975 arrest warrants for nonviolent offenses, mostly driving violations.
> A new report released the week after 18-year old Michael Brown was shot and killed in Ferguson helps explain why. ArchCity Defenders, a St. Louis-area public defender group, says in its report that more than half the courts in St. Louis County engage in the "illegal and harmful practices" of charging high court fines and fees on nonviolent offenses like traffic violations — and then arresting people when they don't pay. The report singles out courts in three communities, including Ferguson.
Because it's a very plausible risk for incentive misalignment. If the department has a role outside of people doing finable activities but is only financed through catching finable activities, false positives are strongly incentivized.
The alternative would have been either no appropriation out of congress or an appropriation beholden to the evildoers, which is kind of where we are now anyway with Mulvaney running the wrecking crew.
It is though. The CFPB has to be able to impose fines large enough to balk the largest financial players in one of the largest economies in the world.
Imagine if the cop that writes your speeding ticket gets paid on commission...
But if that then becomes an incentive for self-dealing, it is very problematic. Instead that money should go directly to citizens in the form of remediation and barring that, deficit paydown or underfunded government services (the VA comes to mind...)
I wouldn't complain if that was the outcome. But I might also imaging using the fines cross-agency like giving the FDA more operating budget to pursue cross-state food safety issues.