3 ms·
This makes me think of a more general principle: usually the people with patents have more resources the the people without, so they have a bigger say in how lo
by radu_floricica 17y ago
This makes me think of a more general principle: usually the people with patents have more resources the the people without, so they have a bigger say in how long patents are valid. Which means all else being equal patent terms will always be longer then optimum.
Probably the best way to go around this is to have/create the political will to deliberately level the playing field for newcomers instead of incumbents.
- isleyaardvark 17y agoBut patents themselves may be the best way to level the playing field for newcomerts. The Mises article makes the case for patents being "unnecessary evils, the relics of an earlier time", but they don't make the case for the flip side. Take the story of Robert Kearns, inventor of the intermittent windshield wiper (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A54564-2005Feb25.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A54564-2005Feb...). Granted, it took a while for him to get a just resolution, but think about what would've happened if patents had been considered an "unnecessary evil" and he had been unable to get one. Not only would he have not gotten any reward for his creativity, but he likely wouldn't have even met with the automakers. And why would he bother tinkering for years to make these wipers when the automakers could just dismantle one, and use their greater resources to copy it? There are a lot of problems with the current patent system, but it should still exist in some form.
- radu_floricica 17y agoI never said they should not! Only that their duration will be negotiated in favor of the incumbents - and they are the guys who'd usually profit from longer terms.