4 ms·

Patents exist to protect small inventors from large companies. If I spend years of my personal time inventing something and I patent it it prevents another larg

Patents exist to protect small inventors from large companies. If I spend years of my personal time inventing something and I patent it it prevents another larger company from using their existing infrastructure to ramp up way faster on my idea. One of the major issues with patents is that they take too long to expire. If the goal is for me to be able to get up and running before a big competitor takes the idea, I need a few years, not a lifetime.

lesuorac 3y ago
I mean all of patent law originates from the Statue of Monopolies [1] which was literally designed to screw over small companies. I do find it amusing how much people call startup small and fast and yet some large company can swoop in and execute on their idea and knock them out of business if it weren't for a patent? [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statute_of_Monopolies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statute_of_Monopolies
- insanitybit 3y ago
  I don't really think either of your statements are that interesting. The first is an extreme oversimplification about England's patent system origins from literally hundreds of years ago, the second is just some sort of straw man that I don't see as being relevant.
coldpie 3y ago
> Patents exist to protect small inventors from large companies. If I spend years of my personal time inventing something and I patent it it prevents another larger company from using their existing infrastructure to ramp up way faster on my idea. It's a cute story, but I suspect the real innovation gains from those small inventors are a teeny, tiny, itty bitty fraction of the harms to innovation caused by the patent system. It's not a good bargain.
- insanitybit 3y ago
  > It's a cute story, but I suspect the real innovation gains from those small inventors are a teeny, tiny, itty bitty fraction of the harms to innovation caused by the patent system. It's not a good bargain. I don't think anyone would really argue otherwise, certainly I would not. I'm just advocating for reform because I think the idea is really valuable.
rcxdude 3y ago
The original motivation for patents was for people to publish their methods so they didn't get monopolised indefinitely or lost. Any bias towards larger or smaller inventors was incidental (and I would say patents work far more against smaller players than for them: if you're a new entry to the market with a new patented innovation, what's your option to actually make anything with that patent considering all the incumbents have plenty that you probably need to compete at all?)
Joker_vD 3y ago
That didn't really worked well at all for the Wright brothers, did it?
- insanitybit 3y ago
  No one is claiming it works well.
justinclift 3y ago
> Patents exist to protect small inventors from large companies. That's the sticker on the front. Not what actually happens though. Wonder if the Patent Office could be sued for false advertising? "it doesn't do what you're selling it as..." :)
nextaccountic 3y ago
Patents are often framed as something that protects the small, but in reality it has been a rigged game from the start. For one thing, patent litigation is expensive and risky. It's uncertain whether a given lawsuit will be successful. And one of the risks is invalidating the patent itself, so litigators often will take a deal (and earn less than what would be owed if infringement were found) Meanwhile big companies can just spam patent applications, amassing a strategic stockpile that makes it less devastating if one of them is invalidated This whole structure serves the interests of big companies even if they are infringing!

lesuorac 3y ago

I mean all of patent law originates from the Statue of Monopolies [1] which was literally designed to screw over small companies. I do find it amusing how much people call startup small and fast and yet some large company can swoop in and execute on their idea and knock them out of business if it weren't for a patent? [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statute_of_Monopolies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statute_of_Monopolies

insanitybit 3y ago
I don't really think either of your statements are that interesting. The first is an extreme oversimplification about England's patent system origins from literally hundreds of years ago, the second is just some sort of straw man that I don't see as being relevant.

coldpie 3y ago

> Patents exist to protect small inventors from large companies. If I spend years of my personal time inventing something and I patent it it prevents another larger company from using their existing infrastructure to ramp up way faster on my idea. It's a cute story, but I suspect the real innovation gains from those small inventors are a teeny, tiny, itty bitty fraction of the harms to innovation caused by the patent system. It's not a good bargain.

insanitybit 3y ago
> It's a cute story, but I suspect the real innovation gains from those small inventors are a teeny, tiny, itty bitty fraction of the harms to innovation caused by the patent system. It's not a good bargain. I don't think anyone would really argue otherwise, certainly I would not. I'm just advocating for reform because I think the idea is really valuable.

rcxdude 3y ago

The original motivation for patents was for people to publish their methods so they didn't get monopolised indefinitely or lost. Any bias towards larger or smaller inventors was incidental (and I would say patents work far more against smaller players than for them: if you're a new entry to the market with a new patented innovation, what's your option to actually make anything with that patent considering all the incumbents have plenty that you probably need to compete at all?)

Joker_vD 3y ago

That didn't really worked well at all for the Wright brothers, did it?

insanitybit 3y ago
No one is claiming it works well.

justinclift 3y ago

> Patents exist to protect small inventors from large companies. That's the sticker on the front. Not what actually happens though. Wonder if the Patent Office could be sued for false advertising? "it doesn't do what you're selling it as..." :)

nextaccountic 3y ago

Patents are often framed as something that protects the small, but in reality it has been a rigged game from the start. For one thing, patent litigation is expensive and risky. It's uncertain whether a given lawsuit will be successful. And one of the risks is invalidating the patent itself, so litigators often will take a deal (and earn less than what would be owed if infringement were found) Meanwhile big companies can just spam patent applications, amassing a strategic stockpile that makes it less devastating if one of them is invalidated This whole structure serves the interests of big companies even if they are infringing!