3 ms·

On the other side, inventors are going to invent anyway for the sake of it and to have something to sell. They could be outspent and out marketed by established

On the other side, inventors are going to invent anyway for the sake of it and to have something to sell. They could be outspent and out marketed by established companies and end up working for them. Similar dynamic to startup entrepreneurs which get acquihired by an incumbent.

number6 4y ago
This is a very useful metaphor. Thanks!
bawolff 4y ago
The point of the patent was less about ensuring people invent, and more about ensuring people invent in the open so other people can (eventually) build on it. The thought goes, that without patents, people will be super secretive about their inventions and the general public will never find out how they work, and thus nobody would ever be able to improve on other people's inventions.
- maxvu 4y ago
  I'm skeptical. The Constitution says "to promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts".
  - VanTheBrand 4y ago
    I’m skeptical too but what OP describes would “promote progress” (by promoting openness vs secrecy). I agree that I’ve always had it explained as “promote progress [by incentivizing creation] but it doesn’t technically specify what he’s implying or what we are.
  - M2Ys4U 4y ago
    Because as we all know there is only one constitution in the whole world, and what it says holds true about everything everywhere for all time...
  - blendergeek 4y ago
    From Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia: > A patent is a type of intellectual property that gives its owner the legal right to exclude others from making, using, or selling an invention for a limited period of time in exchange for publishing an enabling disclosure of the invention. Patents have always been about "promoting the progress of science and useful arts" by promoting disclosure of inventions. The two are intricately linked. More disclosure = more progress.
- Nullabillity 4y ago
  We tried the carrot and it clearly resulted in a dysfunctional system. Time to bring out the stick instead.
- thayne 4y ago
  And now ironically, companies that keep their inventions secret use the patent system to hinder open development of protocols, file formats, and software.
throw0101a 4y ago
> They could be outspent and out marketed by established companies and end up working for them. Or established companies can simply steal their ideas and try to bury them in legal bullshit—like Ford, etc tried to do : * https://thehustle.co/windshield-wiper-inventor-robert-kearns/ https://thehustle.co/windshield-wiper-inventor-robert-kearns... * https://www.autonews.com/article/20081002/ZZZ_SPECIAL/810029938/delayed-wiper-inventor-wins-suit-against-ford https://www.autonews.com/article/20081002/ZZZ_SPECIAL/810029... * https://interestingengineering.com/innovation/how-robert-kearns-took-on-ford-and-chrysler-and-won https://interestingengineering.com/innovation/how-robert-kea... * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Kearns https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Kearns
- pmontra 4y ago
  The first link starts with "50 years ago, Ford stole a patented design for a new type of windshield wiper". No patents, no legal bullshit.
- ByersReason 4y ago
  If I as a small company actually decided to sue a large company, I think that the response would be "hang on, here are 20 of our patents you are infringing on - you actually owe us money". Larger companies treat patents like trading cards, sadly.
squeaky-clean 4y ago
> On the other side, inventors are going to invent anyway for the sake of it and to have something to sell. Are they? Inventors need to eat and sleep, and that's hard to do if someone else with a higher marketing budget and fewer qualms about lying to make a sale rips off your invention a day after launch day. For example the situation between AWS and many open source server-side tools. Recently several companies based around open sourced software with auxiliary monetization plans have chosen to abandon open source in favor of more restrictive licenses that prevent cloud providers from re-branding their software and selling it as their own. > They could be outspent and out marketed by established companies and end up working for them. Or they could decide inventing isn't worth the hassle and they'd rather be a Dentist or something that pays well.

number6 4y ago

This is a very useful metaphor. Thanks!

bawolff 4y ago

The point of the patent was less about ensuring people invent, and more about ensuring people invent in the open so other people can (eventually) build on it. The thought goes, that without patents, people will be super secretive about their inventions and the general public will never find out how they work, and thus nobody would ever be able to improve on other people's inventions.

maxvu 4y ago
I'm skeptical. The Constitution says "to promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts".
- VanTheBrand 4y ago
  I’m skeptical too but what OP describes would “promote progress” (by promoting openness vs secrecy). I agree that I’ve always had it explained as “promote progress [by incentivizing creation] but it doesn’t technically specify what he’s implying or what we are.
- M2Ys4U 4y ago
  Because as we all know there is only one constitution in the whole world, and what it says holds true about everything everywhere for all time...
- blendergeek 4y ago
  From Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia: > A patent is a type of intellectual property that gives its owner the legal right to exclude others from making, using, or selling an invention for a limited period of time in exchange for publishing an enabling disclosure of the invention. Patents have always been about "promoting the progress of science and useful arts" by promoting disclosure of inventions. The two are intricately linked. More disclosure = more progress.
Nullabillity 4y ago
We tried the carrot and it clearly resulted in a dysfunctional system. Time to bring out the stick instead.
thayne 4y ago
And now ironically, companies that keep their inventions secret use the patent system to hinder open development of protocols, file formats, and software.

throw0101a 4y ago

> They could be outspent and out marketed by established companies and end up working for them. Or established companies can simply steal their ideas and try to bury them in legal bullshit—like Ford, etc tried to do : * https://thehustle.co/windshield-wiper-inventor-robert-kearns/ https://thehustle.co/windshield-wiper-inventor-robert-kearns... * https://www.autonews.com/article/20081002/ZZZ_SPECIAL/810029938/delayed-wiper-inventor-wins-suit-against-ford https://www.autonews.com/article/20081002/ZZZ_SPECIAL/810029... * https://interestingengineering.com/innovation/how-robert-kearns-took-on-ford-and-chrysler-and-won https://interestingengineering.com/innovation/how-robert-kea... * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Kearns https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Kearns

pmontra 4y ago
The first link starts with "50 years ago, Ford stole a patented design for a new type of windshield wiper". No patents, no legal bullshit.
ByersReason 4y ago
If I as a small company actually decided to sue a large company, I think that the response would be "hang on, here are 20 of our patents you are infringing on - you actually owe us money". Larger companies treat patents like trading cards, sadly.

squeaky-clean 4y ago

> On the other side, inventors are going to invent anyway for the sake of it and to have something to sell. Are they? Inventors need to eat and sleep, and that's hard to do if someone else with a higher marketing budget and fewer qualms about lying to make a sale rips off your invention a day after launch day. For example the situation between AWS and many open source server-side tools. Recently several companies based around open sourced software with auxiliary monetization plans have chosen to abandon open source in favor of more restrictive licenses that prevent cloud providers from re-branding their software and selling it as their own. > They could be outspent and out marketed by established companies and end up working for them. Or they could decide inventing isn't worth the hassle and they'd rather be a Dentist or something that pays well.