3 ms·
If the successful commercial product is based on the research of someone else, why does building a commercial product that succeeds entitle you to the innovatio
by flkiwi 3y ago
If the successful commercial product is based on the research of someone else, why does building a commercial product that succeeds entitle you to the innovations of others? I tend to favor liberalizing intellectual property, but your lens seems to suggest that value exists only in commercial success which ... is odd.
- jandrese 3y agoI think the problem comes when the correct solution is so obvious that it can be seen years in advance and it becomes a race to see who can patent the obvious solution first before the tech catches up and people start actually building it. This is why people were mad at the "email, but on a cell phone!" patents and all of the "doing thing companies were already doing, but with internet!" patents from entities that don't make a product so they don't have to deal with real world limitations. Once the actual manufacturers start working on the problem they discover all of the obvious solutions locked behind patent walls.
- gizmo 3y agoPatents also block people from coming up with the same design independently. In addition you've got patent trolls who will gladly shake you down but who have no desire to use their patents productively themselves. Patent law turns the simple mechanics of designing a good product into a mess that involves lawyers and other gatekeepers. This benefits incumbents and makes the market inaccessible for upstarts. I don't believe businesses deserve protection from competition. Not even when they've done meaningful original research. Society wins when people with the ability to bring a better product to market are legally allowed to do so.