6 ms·

Are these effects really negative then?

• lmm 10y ago
  For a fixed level of technology, a competitive industry is better for customers than a monopoly industry. But an innovative monopoly may be better than a stagnant competitive industry, and the prospect of monopoly rents encourages innovation. The patent system is supposed to be the compromise here: if you innovate you get 20 years of monopoly, after that your innovation is commoditised.
  • adrianN 10y ago
    It's not really a competition if the companies don't try to innovate.
  • petra 10y ago
    But even when with regards to innovative monopolies, the monopoly can lead in the wrong direction. On example is that today because Google monopolizes search, you cannot find a decent forum search engine, which seems terrible from the Democratic perspective.
  • ZeroGravitas 10y ago
    Of course in reality, patents are filed in large numbers by monopolies, and potential competitors are threatened with nuisance lawsuits, into either avoiding competition with incumbents entirely, or paying fees to them. Another area where the US seems happy to let monopolies flourish at the expense of progress and competition.