3 ms·
tell us how you did it, and in exchange we promise not to compete with you for a while That reasoning definitely hasa role in the history of patents, but I don
by netcan 10y ago
tell us how you did it, and in exchange we promise not to compete with you for a while
That reasoning definitely hasa role in the history of patents, but I don't think it plays much of a modern role either in patent holders advocacy/lobby efforts or in proponent economists' reasoning. Instead, we have a more "modern" & market oriented rationale:
We promise not to compete with you for a while, and that should give you the incentive to create.
This works equally well as a rationale for copyrights. Either way, neither of these arguments can justify retroactive granting of IP rights of any kind. The value has already been created.
- jordigh 10y agoIt is important to know the history, because patent and copyright laws are radically different. In order to understand the differences, we must know where the laws came from. The modern version that people say with "incentive to create" is intended to make people accept legislation for both patents and copyrights as inevitable in order to have innovation. It is a deliberate mind trick to persuade people to accept bad legislation, as this new furniture legislation might be.