3 ms·

The purpose of patents is not to protect your clever ideas because you're special and you deserve it. That's what copyright is for (copyright carries certain re

by hetman 14y ago

The purpose of patents is not to protect your clever ideas because you're special and you deserve it. That's what copyright is for (copyright carries certain restrictions however). Patents are in fact an exchange; something for something. Society gives you a temporary monopoly, that means society incurs a certain loss. However in exchange you reveal all your secrets about how you did it. On the balance of things both you and society are better off. This was one of the things that made guilds obsolete (which existed to protect trade secrets) and so gave us a much more open, fast paced, modern world. Now here's the problem. There is nothing secret about pinch-to-zoom! It makes sense to patent novel innovations in how a specific implementation of pinch-to-zoom works. But patenting a gesture that is so obvious you don't even need a scrap of expertise in the field to see? Ridiculous. This is why a lot of people are beginning to question just what society is getting in exchange for the types of patents being issued today.

MichaelApproved 14y ago
Now here's the problem. There is nothing secret about pinch-to-zoom! It makes sense to patent novel innovations in how a specific implementation of pinch-to-zoom works. But patenting a gesture that is so obvious you don't even need a scrap of expertise in the field to see? Ridiculous. You consider it obvious, the courts do not. Simple is not the same as obvious.
- hetman 14y ago
  You're missing the point. Perhaps it was my fault for using a word that is already loaded with meaning in the context of the patent system, but it wasn't my intention for it to be used in the same way. What I was talking about has nothing to do with how original the idea might be. Let me explain. The problem with the secret guilds wasn't that they didn't create publicly available products. Of course they did. The point was that even upon seeing what they had created, the average expert would have a hard time figuring out how they did it. Patents made that knowledge available to everyone. There is no need for the disclosure of any secrets with something like pinch-to-zoom. You pinch. It zooms. Even a child can grasp that. This is why I said it might make sense to patent a specific implementation of pinch-to-zoom, but not the concept. Additionally, granting a patent here in no way even protects innovation. The patent holder would have implemented pinch-to-zoom whether they could monopolise it or not because it would sell their products. Society gains nothing it wouldn't anyway, and is forced to waste time enforcing stupid monopolies.

by hetman 14y ago

MichaelApproved 14y ago

Now here's the problem. There is nothing secret about pinch-to-zoom! It makes sense to patent novel innovations in how a specific implementation of pinch-to-zoom works. But patenting a gesture that is so obvious you don't even need a scrap of expertise in the field to see? Ridiculous. You consider it obvious, the courts do not. Simple is not the same as obvious.

hetman 14y ago
You're missing the point. Perhaps it was my fault for using a word that is already loaded with meaning in the context of the patent system, but it wasn't my intention for it to be used in the same way. What I was talking about has nothing to do with how original the idea might be. Let me explain. The problem with the secret guilds wasn't that they didn't create publicly available products. Of course they did. The point was that even upon seeing what they had created, the average expert would have a hard time figuring out how they did it. Patents made that knowledge available to everyone. There is no need for the disclosure of any secrets with something like pinch-to-zoom. You pinch. It zooms. Even a child can grasp that. This is why I said it might make sense to patent a specific implementation of pinch-to-zoom, but not the concept. Additionally, granting a patent here in no way even protects innovation. The patent holder would have implemented pinch-to-zoom whether they could monopolise it or not because it would sell their products. Society gains nothing it wouldn't anyway, and is forced to waste time enforcing stupid monopolies.