4 ms·

It's worth mentioning that the USPTO, which everyone here thinks will allow anything, recently issued its fifth rejection of this application.

deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
rbanffy 15y ago
All this proves is that the USPTO will block a patent that could threaten the patent troll industry ;-)
- stcredzero 15y ago
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture If certain Monopolistic practices are directly illegal, what about more laws directed against Regulatory Capture?
  - anamax 15y ago
    > what about more laws directed against Regulatory Capture? Umm, regulatory capture applies to legislatures as well, not just regulatory agencies. Consider GE. Its $0 tax bill is not due to regulations, but to laws.
    - monochromatic 15y ago
      Any sensible income tax law will allow you to offset losses against gains. Otherwise it's just a revenue or cashflow tax, not an income tax.
      - stcredzero 15y ago
        Why doesn't a revenue tax make sense? It may well take a lot more money to regulate an industry involving a great many transactions.
        monochromatic 15y ago
        Maybe it does make sense in some circumstances, I'm no economist. But it's not what we have. We have an income tax. So it doesn't make sense for people to shit on GE for this.
        nmcfarl 15y ago
        The main problem with a revenue tax is margins. If you apply the same rate of taxes to all companies with the same revenue, regardless of their margins you have your choice of putting all low margin business out of business by assessing a tax higher than they can pay (to collect reasonable revenues from the high margin businesses), or leaving a lot of cash on the table in high margin industries (which as a tax authority you probably don't like).
        eru 15y ago
        > Why doesn't a revenue tax make sense? Suppose there are two companies. The first company buys resource A for 100$ to produce B. The second company buys B for 110$ and produces C, which it sells to the public for 120$. A merger of both companies would approximately half their total revenue, but wouldn't change their total profit. We don't want the tax system to determine the optimal size of a company.
      - anamax 15y ago
        > Any sensible income tax law will allow you to offset losses against gains. Yes, but losses, gains, revenue, and expenses are not necessarily well-defined. (Heck - even whom is incurring those things is also variable.) And then there's the big problem - the US govt likes to encourage (and discourage) things via the tax code. GE takes advantage of that as well.
    - stcredzero 15y ago
      Umm, regulatory capture applies to legislatures as well, not just regulatory agencies. Pick one and see what can be done.
      - anamax 15y ago
        > Pick one and see what can be done. Pick both - we already know what can be done. If you're going to argue that this time will be different, you need to explain why. Heck, it would be nice if you understand, deeply, how things work now, what's been tried, and so on. None of the existing problems are easy to solve.
- Symmetry 15y ago
  If the USPTO got to keep the money it collected in patent fees that might be a problem, but if it got to keep the money it got in fees then maybe it would be able to do a better job examining patents. :|

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

rbanffy 15y ago

All this proves is that the USPTO will block a patent that could threaten the patent troll industry ;-)

stcredzero 15y ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture If certain Monopolistic practices are directly illegal, what about more laws directed against Regulatory Capture?
- anamax 15y ago
  > what about more laws directed against Regulatory Capture? Umm, regulatory capture applies to legislatures as well, not just regulatory agencies. Consider GE. Its $0 tax bill is not due to regulations, but to laws.
  - monochromatic 15y ago
    Any sensible income tax law will allow you to offset losses against gains. Otherwise it's just a revenue or cashflow tax, not an income tax.
    - stcredzero 15y ago
      Why doesn't a revenue tax make sense? It may well take a lot more money to regulate an industry involving a great many transactions.
      - monochromatic 15y ago
        Maybe it does make sense in some circumstances, I'm no economist. But it's not what we have. We have an income tax. So it doesn't make sense for people to shit on GE for this.
      - nmcfarl 15y ago
        The main problem with a revenue tax is margins. If you apply the same rate of taxes to all companies with the same revenue, regardless of their margins you have your choice of putting all low margin business out of business by assessing a tax higher than they can pay (to collect reasonable revenues from the high margin businesses), or leaving a lot of cash on the table in high margin industries (which as a tax authority you probably don't like).
      - eru 15y ago
        > Why doesn't a revenue tax make sense? Suppose there are two companies. The first company buys resource A for 100$ to produce B. The second company buys B for 110$ and produces C, which it sells to the public for 120$. A merger of both companies would approximately half their total revenue, but wouldn't change their total profit. We don't want the tax system to determine the optimal size of a company.
    - anamax 15y ago
      > Any sensible income tax law will allow you to offset losses against gains. Yes, but losses, gains, revenue, and expenses are not necessarily well-defined. (Heck - even whom is incurring those things is also variable.) And then there's the big problem - the US govt likes to encourage (and discourage) things via the tax code. GE takes advantage of that as well.
  - stcredzero 15y ago
    Umm, regulatory capture applies to legislatures as well, not just regulatory agencies. Pick one and see what can be done.
    - anamax 15y ago
      > Pick one and see what can be done. Pick both - we already know what can be done. If you're going to argue that this time will be different, you need to explain why. Heck, it would be nice if you understand, deeply, how things work now, what's been tried, and so on. None of the existing problems are easy to solve.
Symmetry 15y ago
If the USPTO got to keep the money it collected in patent fees that might be a problem, but if it got to keep the money it got in fees then maybe it would be able to do a better job examining patents. :|