6 ms·

For an interesting real-world case of ignoring IP laws, one might look at the history of Philips and its light bulbs: - The Netherlands didn't have patent laws

For an interesting real-world case of ignoring IP laws, one might look at the history of Philips and its light bulbs: - The Netherlands didn't have patent laws in the decades that Edison was introducing his lamps - Philips bought up the machines of competitors that Edison drove out of business through his patent monopoly and started producing lamps en masse in the Netherlands - more than a few researches of said former competitors joined Philips' R&D crew, presumably partially out of spite, partially because it was the only place where they could continue their research - this combination of experts and not giving a damn about patents resulted in really quick innovation at Philips' factories, meaning their light bulbs soon were both better and cheaper than anyone else's (of course, this only lasted until the light bulb manufacturers formed a cartel to introduce manufactured obsolescence). - eventually the Netherlands caved in to international pressure to introduce patent laws. By then Philips was so huge that they started abusing it for patent trolling of their own.

rob74 5y ago
About this "manufactured obsolescence of light bulbs" conspiracy theory which gets repeated over and over again: it's not that simple. Light bulbs have a spectacularly bad efficiency already, but the early light bulbs with their extremely long life were even worse. To quote Wikipedia, for a given light bulb, "A 5% reduction in voltage will double the life of the bulb, but reduce its light output by about 16%". So it's a tradeoff: if you make the filament thick enough, you'll have a light bulb which lasts for decades, but shines very dimly while consuming a lot of electricity. To improve efficiency, you can make the filament thinner, but then it'll burn out faster.
- vanderZwan 5y ago
  Funny how that is always used as a counter-argument when nobody gave a shit about light-bulb efficiency until three decades ago. Like, I'm sure it's technically true. I highly doubt this was in any way a motivation back in the day, especially since light bulbs, as inefficient as they are, were still much better than the candles and gaslight that preceded them. There is a difference between a conspiracy theory and a well-documented conspiracy. The things the Phoebus Cartel did falls squarely into the latter, including the planned obsolescence. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoebus_cartel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoebus_cartel
  - iso1210 5y ago
    You'd care if you were plugging up 1kW lightbulbs instead of 100W bulbs.
    - GekkePrutser 5y ago
      Those are called space heaters :) In fact a company in Germany tried to circumvent the EU ban on lightbulbs by calling then heatballs. Makes sense because as a heater they're very efficient.
      - samatman 5y ago
        There also are (or were) a lot of consumer products which used ordinary incandescents for heat. The familiar example to Americans of a certain age is the EZ-Bake Oven, but there was a long tail of others, because if you wanted an off-the-shelf source for ~40-150W of heat, and the light is either a plus or neutral, it was tough to beat an Edison bulb and socket.
        BeefWellington 5y ago
        Another example of this: Bird sanctuaries are harmed by the ban in some ways (though in the meantime they've no doubt found alternatives) because incandescent bulbs make great heaters.[1] [1]: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/incandescent-bulb-ban-leaves-bird-care-centre-with-dim-hope-1.2492890 https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/incandescent-bulb-ban-...
      - mlyle 5y ago
        > Makes sense because as a heater they're very efficient. Resistive heat (like a light bulb or space heater) is terribly inefficient. Resistive heat up high (in a ceiling or on a light) is even worse than resistive heat at ground level, because the heat escapes the dwelling without heating the occupants in the room much.
        pooper 5y ago
- littlestymaar 5y ago
  > About this "manufactured obsolescence of light bulbs" conspiracy theory which gets repeated over and over again: You should be really cautious when using the phrase “conspiracy theory” especially when talking about a cartel for which we have plenty of historical evidences. Of course the Phoebus cartel isn't responsible for all problems with light bulbs, and it didn't even worked as well as it was supposed to and not for as long as it was supposed to, but it is still a real thing.
- jart 5y ago
  Here's what an everlasting lightbulb looks like. https://youtu.be/jx1d3j1IEoI?t=73 https://youtu.be/jx1d3j1IEoI?t=73 I wish they weren't illegal in california.
- R0b0t1 5y ago
  It's not just a theory. It's real. There was enforcement and everything, and decisions made to increase profit at cost of harm to the consumer. Veritasium did a video on it if you'd like to follow up there, and it's sourced.
- ClumsyPilot 5y ago
  "conspiracy theory which gets repeated over and over again" Gravity is also theory - but there is so much evidence that a layman would call both a fact. "To quote Wikipedia, for a given light bulb, "A 5% reduction in voltage will double the life of the bulb, but reduce its light output by about 16%"." The intention is irrelevant - the point is that they conspired to manipulate the market, which is illegal. If it's okay because someome deems the decision right, then robbing banks to feed poor people is okay too.
AniseAbyss 5y ago
Every country ignores copyright in the beginning. America did it too but it is not polite to mention this now. But there is a tipping point when international enforcement of copyright and patents starts to work in your favour.

rob74 5y ago

About this "manufactured obsolescence of light bulbs" conspiracy theory which gets repeated over and over again: it's not that simple. Light bulbs have a spectacularly bad efficiency already, but the early light bulbs with their extremely long life were even worse. To quote Wikipedia, for a given light bulb, "A 5% reduction in voltage will double the life of the bulb, but reduce its light output by about 16%". So it's a tradeoff: if you make the filament thick enough, you'll have a light bulb which lasts for decades, but shines very dimly while consuming a lot of electricity. To improve efficiency, you can make the filament thinner, but then it'll burn out faster.

vanderZwan 5y ago
Funny how that is always used as a counter-argument when nobody gave a shit about light-bulb efficiency until three decades ago. Like, I'm sure it's technically true. I highly doubt this was in any way a motivation back in the day, especially since light bulbs, as inefficient as they are, were still much better than the candles and gaslight that preceded them. There is a difference between a conspiracy theory and a well-documented conspiracy. The things the Phoebus Cartel did falls squarely into the latter, including the planned obsolescence. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoebus_cartel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoebus_cartel
- iso1210 5y ago
  You'd care if you were plugging up 1kW lightbulbs instead of 100W bulbs.
  - GekkePrutser 5y ago
    Those are called space heaters :) In fact a company in Germany tried to circumvent the EU ban on lightbulbs by calling then heatballs. Makes sense because as a heater they're very efficient.
    - samatman 5y ago
      There also are (or were) a lot of consumer products which used ordinary incandescents for heat. The familiar example to Americans of a certain age is the EZ-Bake Oven, but there was a long tail of others, because if you wanted an off-the-shelf source for ~40-150W of heat, and the light is either a plus or neutral, it was tough to beat an Edison bulb and socket.
      - BeefWellington 5y ago
        Another example of this: Bird sanctuaries are harmed by the ban in some ways (though in the meantime they've no doubt found alternatives) because incandescent bulbs make great heaters.[1] [1]: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/incandescent-bulb-ban-leaves-bird-care-centre-with-dim-hope-1.2492890 https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/incandescent-bulb-ban-...
    - mlyle 5y ago
      > Makes sense because as a heater they're very efficient. Resistive heat (like a light bulb or space heater) is terribly inefficient. Resistive heat up high (in a ceiling or on a light) is even worse than resistive heat at ground level, because the heat escapes the dwelling without heating the occupants in the room much.
      - pooper 5y ago
littlestymaar 5y ago
> About this "manufactured obsolescence of light bulbs" conspiracy theory which gets repeated over and over again: You should be really cautious when using the phrase “conspiracy theory” especially when talking about a cartel for which we have plenty of historical evidences. Of course the Phoebus cartel isn't responsible for all problems with light bulbs, and it didn't even worked as well as it was supposed to and not for as long as it was supposed to, but it is still a real thing.
jart 5y ago
Here's what an everlasting lightbulb looks like. https://youtu.be/jx1d3j1IEoI?t=73 https://youtu.be/jx1d3j1IEoI?t=73 I wish they weren't illegal in california.
R0b0t1 5y ago
It's not just a theory. It's real. There was enforcement and everything, and decisions made to increase profit at cost of harm to the consumer. Veritasium did a video on it if you'd like to follow up there, and it's sourced.
ClumsyPilot 5y ago
"conspiracy theory which gets repeated over and over again" Gravity is also theory - but there is so much evidence that a layman would call both a fact. "To quote Wikipedia, for a given light bulb, "A 5% reduction in voltage will double the life of the bulb, but reduce its light output by about 16%"." The intention is irrelevant - the point is that they conspired to manipulate the market, which is illegal. If it's okay because someome deems the decision right, then robbing banks to feed poor people is okay too.

AniseAbyss 5y ago

Every country ignores copyright in the beginning. America did it too but it is not polite to mention this now. But there is a tipping point when international enforcement of copyright and patents starts to work in your favour.