8 ms·
Actually, open-source is the exact opposite of what patents are intended to do - patents discourage trade secrets that die with their inventors by giving their
by Qwertious 11y ago
Actually, open-source is the exact opposite of what patents are intended to do - patents discourage trade secrets that die with their inventors by giving their holders a right to timed exclusivity (regardless of whether other people know how to copy them or not), in exchange for publicly documenting said trade secrets.
Open-source is essentially just a tool for collaborating on software more easily (ignoring the Free Software side for a sec), but which requires giving up propriety over the software.
- chris_wot 11y agoCan you give any example of a trade secret that cannot be reinvented had it not been for patents? Patents are hundreds of years old. In the fifteenth century markets and science was very different to what it is today. There is an argument that patents were helpful before the world evolved to freer markets. I mean, patents were invented around the time of feudalism, and nobody now considers THAT to be a good idea. An example used for the case of patents is James Watt's steam engine, an amazing invention. But in my view it is an example of an invention where innovation was deliberately stymied; sure he improved upon it greatly, but then again he prevented any number of other capable people from doing so and caused a monopoly. And ironically he could not have patented his invention had he not taken the original non-patented ideas of Thomas Savery and Thomas Newcomen, who originally worked out the general principle. In fact, you only have to look at the most important invention IMO the world ever produced to see that patents would have stopped innovation entirely - the printing press, which predates patents by a century. Without the printing press, almost no modern innovation would have been possible. There were vast numbers of printing presses produced that allowed much more rapid dissemination of ideas and ushered in the current age. Had a patent been allowed on this innovation, then the modern day would look much, much more different. Even religion would have been different. No, patents may discourage trade secrets, but you assume that they are the only mechanism for doing so, and you dismiss the fact that they aren't necessary to prevent someone else from discovering that trade secret.