3 ms·
My point was simpler: negotiations don't have to end in agreement, let alone trying to get a patent license. This discussion has devolved into abstract swipes
by caminante 3y ago
My point was simpler: negotiations don't have to end in agreement, let alone trying to get a patent license.
This discussion has devolved into abstract swipes at the patent law system with characterizations that don't even apply if you take the article at face value.
- taeric 3y agoBut that plays into the "wild" part. It is wild that you can refuse to let someone do something that you know how to do. In the "compulsive licensing" world, it would be "wild" to not allow someone to perform a song that you played first. Which is why we don't allow that. In fashion, it would be wild for you to have certain button schemes that nobody else can use. We don't allow that. In math, it would be wild to have equations nobody could use. We... sorta do not allow that.
- caminante 3y agoI understand your point (patents are quirky in that they give unilateral blocking rights). That's not what I'm taking issue with. Remember, the entire premise of this subthread isn't even grounded in the facts of this case!