4 ms·

It was not great before patents when a big company could steal your work and put you out of business after you put in the R&D effort.

ModernMech 5y ago
Now they just file the patent before inventing it, let you do the R&D for them to make it a reality, and sue your for patent infringement when you go to market.
giantg2 5y ago
Yeah, that used to be the point of patents. Now it seems it's mostly to squeeze as much out of people by capturing the majority of the market by not allowing similar products. I mean, we have CEOs of biomedical companies admitting that they aren't basing prices off of what it costs to research, develop, and deliver a therapy, but rather base it off of what a deaparare person is willing to pay for it. This is the very thing antitrust laws were supposed to prevent, but the patent system is used to create a similar environment.
- throwaway5752 5y ago
  Agreed? Patents are being misused. We should fix that. Patents fixed gross injustices when they were created, and we shouldn't forget that, either. Software is probably the worst example of a field for patents and I think the case for patenting algorithms or design is dicey. But if you sink 100M into drug R&D, a novel type of medical device, or a new type of semiconductor CVD process you should have some protection against reverse engineering from competition for a period of time. Since the problem seems to come a lot, maybe the problem is the role of money in politics and we should address the root cause. Just a thought.
  - Notanothertoo 5y ago
    No you shouldn't.. The idea that your idea is so novel it should be legally enforced as "yours" is pretty egotistical imo. How do you credit the millions of ideas you are basing yours off of. It's also information, it's not "stolen" in the sense that multiple people can't use it at the same time. Benefit of rnd is being first to market. You will capture much of the market while everyone else catches up and you are in a better position to innovate. Also without these legal barriers if somebody can improve on it and make it better that's better for the community and consumer at large and allows for constant iteration. Also there is a lot of bad behavior and things encouraged by the patent system. You have judges giving patents over technical nuances they can't possibly learn in a courtroom. You have companies like Intel spending millions on legal teams to enforce things rather then engineering innovation, which is great until you are no longer the dominant player and global players don't play by those rules.
  - giantg2 5y ago
    Drug companies spend more on marketing than on R&D. Much of the research is done with grants and government money. The vast majority of medical devices use the 510K process for approval, which means they are substantially similar to existing device (to bypass testing). Sure some protection is necessary. You could make it based on development costs and have much shorter times for things that were cheap to do. "maybe the problem is the role of money in politics and we should address the root cause. " There are a lot of problems in politics that should be fixed - rules for thee but not for me (rule of law ignored), basically insider trading, high lifetime pensions, long careers, two party system, media bias/lies, and even problems in the voter base (us v them). Money is an issue, but it's really only good if the constituents are gullible or believe in the ends justifying the means. The real root of all of this is that politicians are a separate class from the rest of us and aren't accountable to anyone unless their transgressions are egregious, and then only sometimes. Rule of law has become a joke.
    - throwaway5752 5y ago
      Drug companies are just similar to software in that regard. They acquire a bunch of companies that do basic R&D and get drug pipelines. Those founders get rich because they have patent protection. Just look at biosimilars for a taste of what might happen without patent protections. I am more familiar with the 510(k) that most people are. It bypasses some testing, but there is still a fair amount of work. It has nothing to do with R&D expenditures that may or may not be behind an submission.
      - giantg2 5y ago
        510K is faster and cheaper in regards to studies given that it doesn't necessarily require human data nor clinical trials, which can be fairly large costs.
alisonkisk 5y ago
what big business was doing that before 1789?
Notanothertoo 5y ago
As someone who started a business only to get a bullshit suit that I was unable to afford by one of the largest re insurance providers in the world (#1/2), the idea that the ip/patent legal framework as it is today helps the little guy is a slap in the face. They preemptively sued me in a state I've never worked in or entered for that matter because the favorable corporate law there, and that is why they have their hq there. They would file a bullshit motion, get everyone in front of the judge. Somebody would point it out, they would retract it, and immediately file a new one and request everyone have time to review it. All the while bleeding me dry at 500$ an hour for litigation on top of travel expenses plus the regular legal fees of multiple lawyers across two states. The whole thing was bullshit, lots of red flags but I lacked the capital to assert my agency legally.. The ip/patent framework as it is today helps nobody but big co and promotes regulatory capture. It prevents the kind of reverse engineering you see in China and why we don't have things like removable battery cell phone mods and other "hacks" here. It's why the right to repair is an issue at all, if they didn't have this legal framework they wouldn't be able to enforce any of it legally. Somebody would come along and offer a service to do it at a fraction of the cost. Why do I have to keep buying the same media over and over again on different formats. It's amazing to me seeing the most authoritarian regime in modern history leverage the free market better than the "capitalists". Sorry for the rant but this shit is imo the reason for most of the corporate bullshit today. It's what empowers the lawyers.
- giantg2 5y ago
  The court system is a joke. It has nothing to do with justice. On the criminal side, you can get a citation for a $500 fine and it's better to just plead guilty because a lawyer will cost you at least that much. It's a financial punishment even if you are innocent. If you don't hire a lawyer the judge won't take you seriously and call you names like "sovereign citizen". The number of mistakes and the amount of ignorance by the people running the system is repulsive and leads to violations of rights. As just one laughable example, I had a magistrate think that requesting the case to be dismissed with prejudice was me calling him prejudice. You dont even need to have a law degree or pass the bar to be a magistrate.
- throwaway5752 5y ago

ModernMech 5y ago

Now they just file the patent before inventing it, let you do the R&D for them to make it a reality, and sue your for patent infringement when you go to market.

giantg2 5y ago

Yeah, that used to be the point of patents. Now it seems it's mostly to squeeze as much out of people by capturing the majority of the market by not allowing similar products. I mean, we have CEOs of biomedical companies admitting that they aren't basing prices off of what it costs to research, develop, and deliver a therapy, but rather base it off of what a deaparare person is willing to pay for it. This is the very thing antitrust laws were supposed to prevent, but the patent system is used to create a similar environment.

throwaway5752 5y ago
Agreed? Patents are being misused. We should fix that. Patents fixed gross injustices when they were created, and we shouldn't forget that, either. Software is probably the worst example of a field for patents and I think the case for patenting algorithms or design is dicey. But if you sink 100M into drug R&D, a novel type of medical device, or a new type of semiconductor CVD process you should have some protection against reverse engineering from competition for a period of time. Since the problem seems to come a lot, maybe the problem is the role of money in politics and we should address the root cause. Just a thought.
- Notanothertoo 5y ago
  No you shouldn't.. The idea that your idea is so novel it should be legally enforced as "yours" is pretty egotistical imo. How do you credit the millions of ideas you are basing yours off of. It's also information, it's not "stolen" in the sense that multiple people can't use it at the same time. Benefit of rnd is being first to market. You will capture much of the market while everyone else catches up and you are in a better position to innovate. Also without these legal barriers if somebody can improve on it and make it better that's better for the community and consumer at large and allows for constant iteration. Also there is a lot of bad behavior and things encouraged by the patent system. You have judges giving patents over technical nuances they can't possibly learn in a courtroom. You have companies like Intel spending millions on legal teams to enforce things rather then engineering innovation, which is great until you are no longer the dominant player and global players don't play by those rules.
- giantg2 5y ago
  Drug companies spend more on marketing than on R&D. Much of the research is done with grants and government money. The vast majority of medical devices use the 510K process for approval, which means they are substantially similar to existing device (to bypass testing). Sure some protection is necessary. You could make it based on development costs and have much shorter times for things that were cheap to do. "maybe the problem is the role of money in politics and we should address the root cause. " There are a lot of problems in politics that should be fixed - rules for thee but not for me (rule of law ignored), basically insider trading, high lifetime pensions, long careers, two party system, media bias/lies, and even problems in the voter base (us v them). Money is an issue, but it's really only good if the constituents are gullible or believe in the ends justifying the means. The real root of all of this is that politicians are a separate class from the rest of us and aren't accountable to anyone unless their transgressions are egregious, and then only sometimes. Rule of law has become a joke.
  - throwaway5752 5y ago
    Drug companies are just similar to software in that regard. They acquire a bunch of companies that do basic R&D and get drug pipelines. Those founders get rich because they have patent protection. Just look at biosimilars for a taste of what might happen without patent protections. I am more familiar with the 510(k) that most people are. It bypasses some testing, but there is still a fair amount of work. It has nothing to do with R&D expenditures that may or may not be behind an submission.
    - giantg2 5y ago
      510K is faster and cheaper in regards to studies given that it doesn't necessarily require human data nor clinical trials, which can be fairly large costs.

alisonkisk 5y ago

what big business was doing that before 1789?

Notanothertoo 5y ago

As someone who started a business only to get a bullshit suit that I was unable to afford by one of the largest re insurance providers in the world (#1/2), the idea that the ip/patent legal framework as it is today helps the little guy is a slap in the face. They preemptively sued me in a state I've never worked in or entered for that matter because the favorable corporate law there, and that is why they have their hq there. They would file a bullshit motion, get everyone in front of the judge. Somebody would point it out, they would retract it, and immediately file a new one and request everyone have time to review it. All the while bleeding me dry at 500$ an hour for litigation on top of travel expenses plus the regular legal fees of multiple lawyers across two states. The whole thing was bullshit, lots of red flags but I lacked the capital to assert my agency legally.. The ip/patent framework as it is today helps nobody but big co and promotes regulatory capture. It prevents the kind of reverse engineering you see in China and why we don't have things like removable battery cell phone mods and other "hacks" here. It's why the right to repair is an issue at all, if they didn't have this legal framework they wouldn't be able to enforce any of it legally. Somebody would come along and offer a service to do it at a fraction of the cost. Why do I have to keep buying the same media over and over again on different formats. It's amazing to me seeing the most authoritarian regime in modern history leverage the free market better than the "capitalists". Sorry for the rant but this shit is imo the reason for most of the corporate bullshit today. It's what empowers the lawyers.

giantg2 5y ago
The court system is a joke. It has nothing to do with justice. On the criminal side, you can get a citation for a $500 fine and it's better to just plead guilty because a lawyer will cost you at least that much. It's a financial punishment even if you are innocent. If you don't hire a lawyer the judge won't take you seriously and call you names like "sovereign citizen". The number of mistakes and the amount of ignorance by the people running the system is repulsive and leads to violations of rights. As just one laughable example, I had a magistrate think that requesting the case to be dismissed with prejudice was me calling him prejudice. You dont even need to have a law degree or pass the bar to be a magistrate.
throwaway5752 5y ago