4 ms·
They give an incentive for innovation by granting the original inventor time to bring his invention to market before an established entity uses its existing res
by saulrh 15y ago
They give an incentive for innovation by granting the original inventor time to bring his invention to market before an established entity uses its existing resources to block him out. This model isn't very useful to software, but it works perfectly fine with cars and tractors and other things that take five years from concept to product.
One trivial improvement might be to split patents the same way that major research recognitions are split. If two people come up with something simultaneously and independently, why not give it to both of them?
- quadhome 15y agoYou're both missing the very important compromise of patents. The temporary monopoly patents give were and are understood to be harmful. But, they're less harmful than a world of trade secrets. Which is what we had, before patents. See: guilds. So, we the public offer intellectual property. And, in return, the details of that property become public from the very beginning. And, after a few years, everyone has freedom and the instructions on how to make or do whatever.
- teyc 15y agoExactly. If the state of the world is that people can separately come up with the same "trade secrets", then there is a case against it being patentable.
- rwallace 15y agoAnd that is the fundamental fallacy. Trade secrets are far, far less harmful than patents. If you keep your work a trade secret, your customers still benefit and in the worst case you have at least done no harm. Patent trolls destroy far more value than they steal.