	In England, it wasn’t until 1624, with the English Statute of Monopolies, that patents took the commonly thought of form of awards to individuals. It abolished the established system of royal monopolies except for inventions, to which the criteria for being the “first and true inventor” had to be met. This was a rather loosely flaunted term as many merchants took advantage of inventions crafted abroad and filed for domestic patents in the country, and the convoluted process disallowed those outside of London to conduct patent searches. The fees for patents under this statute also provided a hefty part of the income of several government workers. It is thus, interesting to see how the transition to modern day patenting in England still was not perfected by this time. The focus on creating as much thriving technical progress was mainly focused on the capital alone. Although only inventions were being granted monopolies, as opposed to whole industries, the focus was not on protection of the “true inventor” but rather the protection of the propagation of technology in the country. The benefits of this influx of patents did not only rest in the long term advancement of society but very much in the short term, and thus even fraudulent claims of patent rights were beneficial in helping propel the wheel of economic growth.
	Another notable patenting system in Europe was that of France. Although it, like many forms in similar countries, was based on monopolistic grants from royals, it changed over the years, as the public stance evolved. With several religious wars ad expulsion from the state, the protection of any rights became very inconsistent. However, it was consistently reformed and in 1762 a statute of patents had fixed a period of 15 years for patents, and in 1787 it was amended to grant legal protection to written works as intangible property and faced more rigorous. It was enough to even pose hurdles for Pascal, Huygens, and Leibnitz to gain a patent of their ideas. It was actually effective enough to make France the most industrialized country until the English Industrial Revolution. France is an example of the encouragement of innovation through stringent pre-requisites for claiming ownership. It was also, different from the British system in that it provided more focus on the individual’s right. 
In the United States, intellectual property law can be traced to the founding of the country, and was very much based off the English system. 

	This is a rather patriotic view of the necessity of innovation, much like the one in England, but it did differ in that the phrase “first and true inventor” was not merely a nominal phrase. Committees of experts were assigned to fully analyze the novelty of a possible patent, however the rights of patentees were not viewed as a grace granted by an arbitrary government. This shows how the revolutionary atmosphere had seeped into several aspects of society, especially that of innovation. It seemed that intellectual property was very much individualistic, even more so than that of the English. However, it was still regulated, which was arguably very effective at protecting the rights of original thoughts and innovation. 
