3 ms·
I don't see how it would destroy patent trolls. If anything it would just give them more runway, wouldn't it? They declare a high price they're happy to walk wi
by jurynulifcation 3y ago
I don't see how it would destroy patent trolls. If anything it would just give them more runway, wouldn't it? They declare a high price they're happy to walk with and then continue trolling people with their patent. Corporations will pay the tax to maintain their patent and occasionally engage in minor amounts of corporate raiding against each other by "stealing" patents back and forth they otherwise maintain in perpetuity. Also, what if I build a business on my patent and someone purchases it away? Does the business go, too? Do I get a license? So on and so forth. This seems like an almost guaranteed worse system than we have already.
- cgio 3y agoI am assuming the GP also implies taxation on the value claimed for the patent. Tangentially, I would also love the equivalent option the other way around, I.e. in property taxation, where the government decides the value of the property, to also be obliged to buy the property at that price if so asked by the owner, an option contract of sorts.
- thinkharderdev 3y agoMaybe, like any system it almost certainly looks better on paper than in practice and I haven't thought about it too hard. Mostly I thought it was an interesting idea. > They declare a high price they're happy to walk with and then continue trolling people with their patent They can if they want but by declaring a high price they are also then obligated to pay a lot of taxes. So the system disincentivizes both under and over estimating the value of patents. It also incentivizes property going to the highest value use. So if I can do something more valuable with your patent than you are able to do (for whatever reason) I can afford to pay for it more than you can afford to pay the tax.