4 ms·
It'd be nice to see the end of commoditized patent holding. E.g. Only the creators of a technology can benefit from the patent process. The "proxied from a thir
by mcritz 15y ago
It'd be nice to see the end of commoditized patent holding. E.g. Only the creators of a technology can benefit from the patent process. The "proxied from a third party to sue a second party" without any original innovation is a pathetic puppet show.
Create or die.
- yariang 15y agoI agree with the spirit of your post but realize that selling patents is one way inventors can realize value. If companies couldn't use them as commodities, their value might be diminished. The trading may pose some downsides, but it's not all bad.
- chc 15y agoI thought so at first, but that just begs the question: So what if they're less valuable that way? The purpose of the patent system is not to maximize the monetary value of patents. I mean, the status quo makes patents less valuable than they would be if the government offered a pile of gold to patent-holders every five years, but that doesn't mean the government should offer them gold. The question is, would patents still serve their purpose well enough under such a system? Would inventors be unduly discouraged from getting patents? That doesn't seem likely. Solo inventors would just sell a license to the patent rather than the patent itself. And the biggest deterrent for lone inventors has always been the expense of getting a patent in the first place. That wouldn't change.