4 ms·
Patents don't protect smaller players -- enforcement is cost-prohibitive. The only sector that could plausibly justify patents is biotech... but even there, th
by beambot 3y ago
Patents don't protect smaller players -- enforcement is cost-prohibitive.
The only sector that could plausibly justify patents is biotech... but even there, the vast majority of early R&D is publicly-funded, and thus should negate protection.
A Government-mandated monopoly on ideas may have made sense at some point, but it's antiquated today. Today they serve to stifle innovation, extract rent and act as yet another form of regulatory capture -- e.g. when they become standards.
(Coming from someone who has 20+ patents to their name.)
- RachelF 3y agoIn fact they have the opposite effect on smaller players. The big players all have a few thousand (junk) patents and they make deals with each other to exclude the smaller players, who can't afford to file thousands of patents to join the club.
- slabity 3y agoOr worse, a small player developing something and then finding out after the fact that a junk patent prevents them from even selling the thing to begin with.
- worthless-trash 3y agoSee, this to me is the stupidest part of the whole system. Its essentially saying that 'first movers advantage' of an idea is something that can be protected for the life of a patent. You can be tripped over by patents you don't even know existed in unrelated fields, owned by people who didnt even work with the patent. So stupid.
- AlbertCory 3y agoEveryone always says this. In fact, I was in Google's patent litigation division, and I can tell you firsthand that there is WAY less of this than you think. A cross-licensing deal is incredibly hard to negotiate. So if you could back this up with some links, it'd be appreciated. Otherwise it's just an urban myth.
- vvvvvvvvvvvv 3y agothey might mean an unspoken deal no to sue each other rather than a written one
- AlbertCory 3y agousually what I hear is "they've cross-licensed." That doesn't translate as "unspoken deal."
- RachelF 3y agoIt's not a myth, I've been involved in these sort of negotiations. The particular industry was maybe 10 years older than Google, but the number of patents, rather than their quality was the key factor.
- AlbertCory 3y agosince I've been watching Mythbusters: this one is not "confirmed." It's "plausible." There are some, but it's nowhere near universal.
- beambot 3y agoAll from the first page of quick Google search... Google and Samsung sign global patent cross-license deal https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2014/01/google-and-samsung-sign-global-patent-cross-license-deal/ https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2014/01/google-and-samsung-s... Google and Tencent agree to cross-license patents https://www.ft.com/content/0a1b904d-77f9-3b48-885d-0c2693a6dc61 https://www.ft.com/content/0a1b904d-77f9-3b48-885d-0c2693a6d... SAP and Google Cozy Up With Wide-Reaching Patent Deal: The Potential Implications https://www.constellationr.com/blog-news/insights/sap-and-google-cozy-wide-reaching-patent-deal-potential-implications https://www.constellationr.com/blog-news/insights/sap-and-go... Google and Cisco Enter Into Patent Cross-Licensing Agreement https://newsroom.cisco.com/c/r/newsroom/en/us/a/y2014/m02/google-and-cisco-enter-into-patent-cross-licensing-agreement.html https://newsroom.cisco.com/c/r/newsroom/en/us/a/y2014/m02/go...
- 3y ago