5 ms·

This is another one (of many) viewpoints that would seem to argue against institutionalizing the concept of "intellecutal property". "The rate of cultural and

by bediger 16y ago

This is another one (of many) viewpoints that would seem to argue against institutionalizing the concept of "intellecutal property". "The rate of cultural and economic progress depends on the rate at which ideas are having sex", "In the modern world, innovation is a collective enterprise that relies on exchange" and other similar phrases and sentences permeate the article. Are we lobotomizing current culture, or merely freezing it in place with patents, copyrights and other "intellectual property" conceptions?

10ren 16y ago
Patented inventions can still have sex; in fact, patenting requires them to be published. It's trade secrets that enforce celibacy. You don't have to be able to use an invention commercially to learn from it, combine it with other ideas, improve on it, invent around it.
- kiba 16y ago
  It is an unwarranted assumption that patents actually increase promiscuity of ideas. Rather, patents probably impedes the progress of industries as varied as steam engines and software. There is at least two economists in the world who dispute patents and copyright having place in the natural order of the free market: Examine the evidence and decide for yourself: It is common to argue that intellectual property in the form of copyright and patent is necessary for the innovation and creation of ideas and inventions such as machines, drugs, computer software, books, music, literature and movies. In fact intellectual property is not like ordinary property at all, but constitutes a government grant of a costly and dangerous private monopoly over ideas. We show through theory and example that intellectual monopoly is not neccesary for innovation and as a practical matter is damaging to growth, prosperity and liberty. -- Against Intellectual Monopoly http://levine.sscnet.ucla.edu/general/intellectual/againstfinal.htm http://levine.sscnet.ucla.edu/general/intellectual/againstfi... The book is free to read online, but you can also get yourself a dead tree version of the book if you like.
  - deleted 16y ago
    [deleted]
  - pwhelan 16y ago
    But it is an unwarranted assumption that patents inherently inhibit the promiscuity of ideas. Through theory and example people have also shown that virtually unregulated capitalism produces the "most prosperous" results. They have done this for Marxism as well. Properly applied patents and intellectual property protection can aid the rate of innovation and progress.
    - kiba 16y ago
      The keyword is Properly applied. Now, has it ever been properly applied in this world? Can it ever be applied correctly in this world? How hard is it to apply it properly in this world if it can be applied?
      - pwhelan 16y ago
        Well, what does it mean "be applied correctly" to you? Proper application may not be particularly palatable. There is no free lunch. I would argue that the drug development has generally had properly applied patents. Drug prices suck. That poor countries cannot get adequate medical drugs sucks. However that is an entirely different kind of pain than the drugs not existing yet. It is likely not that hard to apply properly. I think we just don't like how it feels. It reminds me of free speech. We gain so much good from it -- but we also have the Hannity, Beck, Jenny McCarthy types too.
- cturner 16y ago
  It's trade secrets that enforce celibacy. Do trade secrets still exist?* Staff turnover and international travel are such in the modern world is such that ideas get out. Even obviously meant-to-be-secret stuff like codes needed to decrypt DVDs or SMB/CIFS message get out. Lots of things that do get patented could easily be reverse-engineered were they not published. You don't have to be able to use an invention commercially to learn from it, combine it with other ideas, improve on it, invent around it. Do companies ask talented engineers to spend time discussing rivals' patents and applications to pick out worthwhile stuff? Does anyone know of any examples of innovation that has come from the study of patent documents? * I thought of a candidate. I was once told that there was insider knowledge involved in the production of the glass that goes into true glass eyes, held by a community of glassblowers in a town in eastern germany, and that this is key to being able to get the glass dynamic enough to do things like make the veins look right.
  - philwelch 16y ago
    Lots of trade secrets exist, recipes in particular. Source code may also qualify.
rick888 16y ago
"Are we lobotomizing current culture, or merely freezing it in place with patents, copyrights and other "intellectual property" conceptions?" I have a different take on it. Patents, copyrights, and intellectual property increases the rate of new technology because people are forced to be creative (companies have to put R&D into something new and different that isn't already protected). If Google could just copy the iPhone, do you think we would have ever seen anything like the new Android phones? Open source is another example of this phenomenon. How many Linux distros do we have out there that are just copies of the same thing? Even look at apps like VNC. I've seen so many companies just use VNC as a base for their remote viewing app rather than engineer something new. This results in the same bugs, slowness, and overall bad technology rather than a fresh, new approach. Everyone complains about Mysql, yet nobody really has an incentive to create something to replace it (because it's easier to just use it).
- DaniFong 16y ago
  I haven't yet met any inventor worth a damn that wouldn't invent and innovate for the heck of it. There are really only two things I see patents incentivizing: innovation in otherwise unattractive fields, and development of further innovations due to money won from licensing. I'm not familiar enough with each to comment on how well this works in practice.
- kiba 16y ago
  There is no such thing as free lunch. It might be more economically efficient to put effort into old technologies rather than trying to come up with novel technologies that does the same thing a little bit better. Sorta like how Linux was able to run on anything and everything. Google chrome, Firefox, and other browsers do not seem to suffer from too much duplications even though they are open source.
  - rick888 16y ago
    "Google chrome, Firefox, and other browsers do not seem to suffer from too much duplications even though they are open source." We also aren't seeing much development of innovative new browsers (even though we may not need a new browser), aside from the recent chrome browser. The fact that Internet Explorer is closed source created the need for something new (Firefox). Once all of the browsers are open, it will leave even less of an incentive for a new one to be created. Which might be fine, but browser innovation will stagnate. I hate to see a world where all software was like this. Even Linux was created as an open alternative to closed, proprietary, Unices of the day. Would you even bother creating your own operating system now? Most people would just take the Linux kernel and branch out from there. This same principal can also be applied to development jobs. At some point, most businesses won't require engineers any longer (high paying, intelligent software developers) because the difficult parts have already been created, refined, and given out for free. Instead, a code mechanic (low paying, less education) will be all most businesses need. In essence, open source developers are putting themselves out of a future job. I suppose this is what eventually happens to all industries.
tjmaxal 16y ago
Patents are really just like prostitutes. You can have all the sex you want you just have to pay for it. This doesn't hinder the level of sex it just raises the cost from zero to something a little higher.

by bediger 16y ago

10ren 16y ago

Patented inventions can still have sex; in fact, patenting requires them to be published. It's trade secrets that enforce celibacy. You don't have to be able to use an invention commercially to learn from it, combine it with other ideas, improve on it, invent around it.

kiba 16y ago
It is an unwarranted assumption that patents actually increase promiscuity of ideas. Rather, patents probably impedes the progress of industries as varied as steam engines and software. There is at least two economists in the world who dispute patents and copyright having place in the natural order of the free market: Examine the evidence and decide for yourself: It is common to argue that intellectual property in the form of copyright and patent is necessary for the innovation and creation of ideas and inventions such as machines, drugs, computer software, books, music, literature and movies. In fact intellectual property is not like ordinary property at all, but constitutes a government grant of a costly and dangerous private monopoly over ideas. We show through theory and example that intellectual monopoly is not neccesary for innovation and as a practical matter is damaging to growth, prosperity and liberty. -- Against Intellectual Monopoly http://levine.sscnet.ucla.edu/general/intellectual/againstfinal.htm http://levine.sscnet.ucla.edu/general/intellectual/againstfi... The book is free to read online, but you can also get yourself a dead tree version of the book if you like.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
- pwhelan 16y ago
  But it is an unwarranted assumption that patents inherently inhibit the promiscuity of ideas. Through theory and example people have also shown that virtually unregulated capitalism produces the "most prosperous" results. They have done this for Marxism as well. Properly applied patents and intellectual property protection can aid the rate of innovation and progress.
  - kiba 16y ago
    The keyword is Properly applied. Now, has it ever been properly applied in this world? Can it ever be applied correctly in this world? How hard is it to apply it properly in this world if it can be applied?
    - pwhelan 16y ago
      Well, what does it mean "be applied correctly" to you? Proper application may not be particularly palatable. There is no free lunch. I would argue that the drug development has generally had properly applied patents. Drug prices suck. That poor countries cannot get adequate medical drugs sucks. However that is an entirely different kind of pain than the drugs not existing yet. It is likely not that hard to apply properly. I think we just don't like how it feels. It reminds me of free speech. We gain so much good from it -- but we also have the Hannity, Beck, Jenny McCarthy types too.
cturner 16y ago
It's trade secrets that enforce celibacy. Do trade secrets still exist?* Staff turnover and international travel are such in the modern world is such that ideas get out. Even obviously meant-to-be-secret stuff like codes needed to decrypt DVDs or SMB/CIFS message get out. Lots of things that do get patented could easily be reverse-engineered were they not published. You don't have to be able to use an invention commercially to learn from it, combine it with other ideas, improve on it, invent around it. Do companies ask talented engineers to spend time discussing rivals' patents and applications to pick out worthwhile stuff? Does anyone know of any examples of innovation that has come from the study of patent documents? * I thought of a candidate. I was once told that there was insider knowledge involved in the production of the glass that goes into true glass eyes, held by a community of glassblowers in a town in eastern germany, and that this is key to being able to get the glass dynamic enough to do things like make the veins look right.
- philwelch 16y ago
  Lots of trade secrets exist, recipes in particular. Source code may also qualify.

rick888 16y ago

"Are we lobotomizing current culture, or merely freezing it in place with patents, copyrights and other "intellectual property" conceptions?" I have a different take on it. Patents, copyrights, and intellectual property increases the rate of new technology because people are forced to be creative (companies have to put R&D into something new and different that isn't already protected). If Google could just copy the iPhone, do you think we would have ever seen anything like the new Android phones? Open source is another example of this phenomenon. How many Linux distros do we have out there that are just copies of the same thing? Even look at apps like VNC. I've seen so many companies just use VNC as a base for their remote viewing app rather than engineer something new. This results in the same bugs, slowness, and overall bad technology rather than a fresh, new approach. Everyone complains about Mysql, yet nobody really has an incentive to create something to replace it (because it's easier to just use it).

DaniFong 16y ago
I haven't yet met any inventor worth a damn that wouldn't invent and innovate for the heck of it. There are really only two things I see patents incentivizing: innovation in otherwise unattractive fields, and development of further innovations due to money won from licensing. I'm not familiar enough with each to comment on how well this works in practice.
kiba 16y ago
There is no such thing as free lunch. It might be more economically efficient to put effort into old technologies rather than trying to come up with novel technologies that does the same thing a little bit better. Sorta like how Linux was able to run on anything and everything. Google chrome, Firefox, and other browsers do not seem to suffer from too much duplications even though they are open source.
- rick888 16y ago
  "Google chrome, Firefox, and other browsers do not seem to suffer from too much duplications even though they are open source." We also aren't seeing much development of innovative new browsers (even though we may not need a new browser), aside from the recent chrome browser. The fact that Internet Explorer is closed source created the need for something new (Firefox). Once all of the browsers are open, it will leave even less of an incentive for a new one to be created. Which might be fine, but browser innovation will stagnate. I hate to see a world where all software was like this. Even Linux was created as an open alternative to closed, proprietary, Unices of the day. Would you even bother creating your own operating system now? Most people would just take the Linux kernel and branch out from there. This same principal can also be applied to development jobs. At some point, most businesses won't require engineers any longer (high paying, intelligent software developers) because the difficult parts have already been created, refined, and given out for free. Instead, a code mechanic (low paying, less education) will be all most businesses need. In essence, open source developers are putting themselves out of a future job. I suppose this is what eventually happens to all industries.

tjmaxal 16y ago

Patents are really just like prostitutes. You can have all the sex you want you just have to pay for it. This doesn't hinder the level of sex it just raises the cost from zero to something a little higher.