3 ms·
That is no the whole point, and certainly hasn't been going back to the 18th century at least. It is routine for patent holders to license their patents to manu
by simonh 5y ago
That is no the whole point, and certainly hasn't been going back to the 18th century at least. It is routine for patent holders to license their patents to manufacturers for production. That would not be possible if inventors had to make the product for commercial sale by themselves. It would render novel inventions by independent inventors untenable. Only big corporations with manufacturing resources would ever be able to patent anything.
Take James Watt for example, Matthew Boulton could just have told Watt to take a hike and started manufacturing improved steam engines by himself. Watt couldn't have afforded to make steam engines independently, and why would any investor bother supporting him with capital if they could just set up production without him too?
The problem is with trivial patents, not patents in general.
- dantheman 5y agoYour facts are completely false, and in fact it's easier to bring things to market than it's ever been. Watts held back progress significantly and steam engine development was hampered by his and others patents until the expired. The steam engine would have been built to pump water out of mines whether patents existed or not.