) Kimble also argues that Brulotte suppresses technological innovation
and harms the national economy by preventing parties from
reaching agreements to commercialize patents. This Court cannot
tell whether that is true. Brulotte leaves parties free to enter alternative
arrangements that may suffice to accomplish parties’ payment
deferral and risk-spreading goals. And neither Kimble nor his amici
offer any empirical evidence connecting Brulotte to decreased innovation.
In any event, claims about a statutory precedent’s consequences
for innovation are “more appropriately addressed to Congress.” Halliburton,
573 U. S., at ___. Pp. 16–18.