3 ms·
Ugggh. Since the idea behind patents is to promote innovation, and not prevent it.. why can't that be a measure evaluated in the process of granting or enforcin
by famousactress 16y ago
Ugggh. Since the idea behind patents is to promote innovation, and not prevent it.. why can't that be a measure evaluated in the process of granting or enforcing the patent?
Microsoft should have to provide a compelling argument for how much money went into the 'research' around these UI paradigms, how without that investment these ideas would have never come about, how allowing them time to recoup that investment is better for the world than allowing other entities to copy the work.
In short, we're all collectively allowing these companies to file and enforce these patents ... we should expect them to prove to us that they're worthy.
- Peaker 16y agoOr maybe just try disallowing patents altogether for a couple of decades to see how that works out?
- famousactress 16y agoDon't get me wrong.. I'm as cynical as the next guy about the patent system.. but I do think the merits of the lucid arguments for it ought to be considered in a re-think. If you're spending loads of money on research to make an idea possible, and that idea is easily copied in a way that undercuts your ability to profit.. then I guess I get that. I just think you ought to have to _prove_ it. Effectively, this would come pretty close to eliminating software patents altogether... but presumably wouldn't hurt the abilities of biotech, pharma, medical devices and the like where (I assume) the research dollars are often very real.