2 ms·
From what I have heard, the sawstop 'inventor' is a patent attorney first, and an engineer second. Whilst he has offered to license the technology to other bran
by rocqua 3y ago
From what I have heard, the sawstop 'inventor' is a patent attorney first, and an engineer second. Whilst he has offered to license the technology to other brands, reportedly the terms he offered were ridiculous.
The bosch system was significantly different. Notably having the advantage of not destroying the blade when triggered. The sawstop patent removed this major innovation from the market. A clear example of stifled innovation.
Moreover, sawstop doesn't sell in Europe, nor license. Which leaves me with no option to make use of this great innovation. Not quite stiffling innovation, but still making the world worse.
With a 5 year patent, sawstop would still have been profitable I believe. But we would have safer tablesaws around the world, we would have systems that don't ruin blades when triggered, and probably have many other innovations on top of that.
- hakfoo 3y agoI feel like mandatory licensing is the answer. Have a state ombudsman who sets a price of "marginally above reasonable" so that people are still encouraged to negotiate first, while providing a way out when it's obvious the patent-holder is not acting in good faith. Everyone wins: the inventor gets a payday even if he can't deliver directly, consumers don't have to choose between "brand I trust" and "patent-exclusive feature I need", and manufacturers stay out of the courts. You get the payday, whether it's your one man startup or a massive industrial that actually delivers the product to market.