3 ms·

It's even worse. The way things currently are incentivizes patent trolls to NOT create anything. Because then the companies they're suing might have a defensi

It's even worse. The way things currently are incentivizes patent trolls to NOT create anything. Because then the companies they're suing might have a defensive patent they could use against the troll to exact a settlement. Patent trolls are incentivized to not create any value lest that value be used against them.

honzzz 14y ago
It seems to me that the US patent law is a system for transferring money from those who actually do stuff to those who don't. This is huge burden on business. Fear of getting sued to death is not the best motivation for creating new and exciting things - are you not afraid that start-ups will start to move out of US jurisdiction? I know that Silicon Valley is the best place for start-ups and whatnot... but is it still worth it? Seeing lawsuit after lawsuit... I would never incorporate in the US - would you?
- luriel 14y ago
  > It seems to me that the US patent law is a system for transferring money from those who actually do stuff to those who don't. This is not surprising from an economic point of view once you realize that the patent system is basically a system of government granted monopolies.
  - deleted 14y ago
    [deleted]
  - honzzz 14y ago
    But that "system of government granted monopolies" was supposed to channel money to those who create stuff, not from them. The problem with patent law is not that its government granted monopoly but that it's granted to those who do not bring anything to society and is used against those who do.
patrikmcguire 14y ago
Intellectual Ventures, at least, is structured as tens of thousands of theoretically independent corporations each owning one or a small number of patents. The idea is to have as few assets as possible in the suing agent so that there's no point in countersuing for any misconduct in the proceedings like barratry: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barratry_%28common_law%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barratry_%28common_law%29 Misconduct may not be the best phrase, since there are a million ways to be liable that don't involve wrongdoing, but the idea is the same - you want to construct an artificial you that's as poor as possible so you have that much less to lose. It's why the RIAA does the suing rather than the record companies themselves - you've got a long lawsuit to prove that anyone pierced the corporate veil before you can get anywhere near touching the entity with the actual monetary stake. IANAL, so don't go too crazy with this.

honzzz 14y ago

It seems to me that the US patent law is a system for transferring money from those who actually do stuff to those who don't. This is huge burden on business. Fear of getting sued to death is not the best motivation for creating new and exciting things - are you not afraid that start-ups will start to move out of US jurisdiction? I know that Silicon Valley is the best place for start-ups and whatnot... but is it still worth it? Seeing lawsuit after lawsuit... I would never incorporate in the US - would you?

luriel 14y ago
> It seems to me that the US patent law is a system for transferring money from those who actually do stuff to those who don't. This is not surprising from an economic point of view once you realize that the patent system is basically a system of government granted monopolies.
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
- honzzz 14y ago
  But that "system of government granted monopolies" was supposed to channel money to those who create stuff, not from them. The problem with patent law is not that its government granted monopoly but that it's granted to those who do not bring anything to society and is used against those who do.

patrikmcguire 14y ago

Intellectual Ventures, at least, is structured as tens of thousands of theoretically independent corporations each owning one or a small number of patents. The idea is to have as few assets as possible in the suing agent so that there's no point in countersuing for any misconduct in the proceedings like barratry: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barratry_%28common_law%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barratry_%28common_law%29 Misconduct may not be the best phrase, since there are a million ways to be liable that don't involve wrongdoing, but the idea is the same - you want to construct an artificial you that's as poor as possible so you have that much less to lose. It's why the RIAA does the suing rather than the record companies themselves - you've got a long lawsuit to prove that anyone pierced the corporate veil before you can get anywhere near touching the entity with the actual monetary stake. IANAL, so don't go too crazy with this.