But wouldn't this just make the government the #1 rent seeker?

Intellectual property ownership does not always foster innovation (see: patent trolls). If the ongoing cost of the government-provided monopoly was tied to the value of the idea, patent trolls would go extinct. Harberger taxation! arpitrage.substack.com/p/a-harberge...

Pretty easy to imagine a scenario where a well-connected player makes a game of having the government force the sale of a company's patents. Just trading one monster for another. And of course, since this is a Trump administration proposal, this monster will be worse than you can imagine.

What’s the mechanism of harm here? You have a patent that’s worth $x, and a company pays you $x for it. You now have money instead of a patent. The company now owns the patent and pays the licensing fee instead of you.

If this transfer causes you more than $x harm, then the patent was actually worth more than $x, right?

Company A: We made this neat invention and we want to use it. Company B: We want to buy the patent from you. Company A: I don't want to sell my patent. Company B: The government insists you sell your patent to us. Company A: What? Company B: We are suing you for violation of our patent.

You think you've discovered a secret strategy that automatically will eliminate waste and corruption. I'm sorry to say, you have not. You've just changed the parameters and it will quickly be gamed in ways you aren't really willing to consider.

What? I think you’re reading things that aren’t present in my words. If Company A is a patent troll and Company B is productive, this is a good outcome. If Company A values the patent at what it’s worth, now they have its worth in dollars instead of in an illiquid patent they’re paying fees on.

I think something like a right of refusal/bidding process would be a fair way to allow companies to retain IP if they’re willing to pay the higher licensing fee associated with a higher valuation