6 ms·

Or dont do patents at all.

birdyrooster 6y ago
Patents were made for a time before ubiquitous multinational corporations. If there are multiple sources of truth and markets for what is protected invention, then it greatly dilutes the power of that patent. This ends up hamstringing the countries most dependent on patenting to encourage innovation because we are still beholden to foreign interest who file their patents with the USPO or sell to an American troll. The US is the most fastidious in their preservation of patent law despite its many flaws and this is why we will lose out most in the global turning against protected invention.
- missedthecue 6y ago
  I believe you'll find that ubiquitous multinational corporations do indeed outdate the patent, by a couple hundred years.
  - birdyrooster 6y ago
    Ubiquitous as in many? or just a few colonizing the world?
- rswail 6y ago
  All developing nations ignore international copyright, trademark, and patent IP rights. The US did it back in the late 19th century, other nations in the early 20th, Asian nations in the late 20th century. What is happening now is nothing new. China is now starting to enforce IP rights because as they move up the industry maturity scale, the rights become more important. IP rights only become relevant to developed nations, where manufacturing and other primary/secondary industries become less important than service industries. There is no "global turning against protected invention". There is "developing vs developed nations ongoing opposing interests".
JamesBarney 6y ago
You still need patents. Healthcare is an obvious example, if we eliminated patents we'd have 0 new drugs pass FDA approval over the next decade. But software is very different from medical patents.
- pacifist 6y ago
  Really? How about socializing all of medicine.
  - AnimalMuppet 6y ago
    Including drug discovery? I'm very skeptical of that working out better than the current system (for drug discovery).
    - monocasa 6y ago
      Our current system uses incredible amounts of public funding for drug discovery. https://www.pnas.org/content/115/10/2329 https://www.pnas.org/content/115/10/2329
      - TomVDB 6y ago
        The article references mentions $100B over a period of 7 years, or $14B per year. That’s a decent chunk of money, but it’s important to put it in perspective. Pfizer alone spends around $10B per year on R&D. J&J: $12B. Merck: $13B.
        monocasa 6y ago
        And how much of the expenditure goes anywhere useful? And remember that they're incentivized to report 15% of their revenue being spent on R&D for tax reasons. That $100B is just for drugs that later got FDA approval, not the NIH grant budget.
        TomVDB 6y ago

Patents were made for a time before ubiquitous multinational corporations. If there are multiple sources of truth and markets for what is protected invention, then it greatly dilutes the power of that patent. This ends up hamstringing the countries most dependent on patenting to encourage innovation because we are still beholden to foreign interest who file their patents with the USPO or sell to an American troll. The US is the most fastidious in their preservation of patent law despite its many flaws and this is why we will lose out most in the global turning against protected invention.

missedthecue 6y ago
I believe you'll find that ubiquitous multinational corporations do indeed outdate the patent, by a couple hundred years.
- birdyrooster 6y ago
  Ubiquitous as in many? or just a few colonizing the world?
rswail 6y ago
All developing nations ignore international copyright, trademark, and patent IP rights. The US did it back in the late 19th century, other nations in the early 20th, Asian nations in the late 20th century. What is happening now is nothing new. China is now starting to enforce IP rights because as they move up the industry maturity scale, the rights become more important. IP rights only become relevant to developed nations, where manufacturing and other primary/secondary industries become less important than service industries. There is no "global turning against protected invention". There is "developing vs developed nations ongoing opposing interests".

JamesBarney 6y ago

You still need patents. Healthcare is an obvious example, if we eliminated patents we'd have 0 new drugs pass FDA approval over the next decade. But software is very different from medical patents.

pacifist 6y ago
Really? How about socializing all of medicine.
- AnimalMuppet 6y ago
  Including drug discovery? I'm very skeptical of that working out better than the current system (for drug discovery).
  - monocasa 6y ago
    Our current system uses incredible amounts of public funding for drug discovery. https://www.pnas.org/content/115/10/2329 https://www.pnas.org/content/115/10/2329
    - TomVDB 6y ago
      The article references mentions $100B over a period of 7 years, or $14B per year. That’s a decent chunk of money, but it’s important to put it in perspective. Pfizer alone spends around $10B per year on R&D. J&J: $12B. Merck: $13B.
      - monocasa 6y ago
        And how much of the expenditure goes anywhere useful? And remember that they're incentivized to report 15% of their revenue being spent on R&D for tax reasons. That $100B is just for drugs that later got FDA approval, not the NIH grant budget.
        TomVDB 6y ago