4 ms·
And herein lies the problem with patent reform. The patent system is horribly broken, no doubt. But now that everything -- and I mean everything -- is turning
by DanielBMarkham 15y ago
And herein lies the problem with patent reform.
The patent system is horribly broken, no doubt. But now that everything -- and I mean everything -- is turning into software, what does that mean for patents?
The capitalist answer is that we should let ideas freely grow and fight each other in the marketplace, but having an idea and selling an idea are two completely different skills. We will reward the salespeople, marketers, and business creators at the expense of the ideas people.
Perhaps that is what we want. Perhaps all ideas, not just startup business ideas, will become worthless. Execution will be the only thing that matters. If so, that's going to have some major impacts in the rest of society. It'll be interesting to watch this play out.
- igorhvr 15y agoYou are assuming that the patent system as it stands rewards people who have ideas (more than the alternative of having no patents at all would). I think there is a good chance that this is not true at all. Some possibilities: Maybe the system rewards people with the best lawyers? Perhaps the system rewards people who are more worried at shooting the other runners instead of running as fast as he possibly can? It could also be that it rewards large companies (since worrying about patents is mostly outside the radar of small companies), making good people want to join them? Ideas will not ever become worthless, if only because often it takes a certain mindset to extract value out of them.
- DanielBMarkham 15y agoYou are assuming that the patent system as it stands rewards people who have ideas Sorry, I should have been clearer: I am describing the purpose of the patent system, not the current application of the patent system. As I said, the actual application of the patent system is horribly broken. My question was whether or not the underlying assumptions that created the patent system in the first place will still be valid or not once everything becomes bits.
- bd_at_rivenhill 15y agoMaybe the system rewards people with the best lawyers? Close, but I think that the correct answer is that the system rewards the lawyers themselves.
- wnight 15y ago> The capitalist answer [...] Would be to ditch patents completely. Rent-seeking and government protectionism are specifically anti-capitalist. > Perhaps all ideas, not just startup business ideas, will become worthless. If by worthless, you mean impossible to shackle for money, then yes. But then, we normally call that 'common knowledge' and it's a good thing. It's this language we share.
- gaius 15y agoWell, how do you propose making investment in R&D worthwhile? The alternative to patents is weapons-grade industrial secrets.
- wnight 15y agoBy letting inventors use their inventions without trolls getting in the way. The patent system doesn't recognize independent invention though reality does. Imagine having your valuable R&D rendered worthless by an injunction prohibiting you from distributing your product, that's what patents do. Very little of what patents describe could be called original and they aren't described in a way to help people learn. While congress may have enacted them thinking they'd spur invention it's pretty obvious to developers operating in a patent-laden world that they do nothing of the sort. We aren't allowed to look at patents and when we do they aren't written to educate but to obfuscate. When our companies milk us for ideas they aren't interested in our ground-breaking earth-changing ideas, but simple (easily infringed) ways to do [common thing] [in a slightly new medium].