3 ms·
Liquidity in the patent market isn't the issue. Building tangible things and pushing forward the pace of innovation is. Kodak would still innovate without the
by dbrian 14y ago
Liquidity in the patent market isn't the issue. Building tangible things and pushing forward the pace of innovation is. Kodak would still innovate without the ability to liquidate their patent library during bankruptcy. Is the reduced risk to investors really worth having technology hoarded by non-practicing entities?
- rayiner 14y agoThat's like saying we should assign real estate to the public domain on bankruptcy, because people will still develop land even if the can't liquidate that real estate in bankruptcy.
- pyre 14y agoThat's a poor example. Patents are almost always way more broad (and far-reaching) than real estate holdings.
- dbrian 14y agoIntellectual property is not the same thing as physical property. They serve entirely different purposes.
- rayiner 14y agoThe point is that "Kodak would still innovate without the ability to liquidate patents in bankruptcy" isn't any more or less true when it comes to patents than when it comes to any other kind of property, because the mecahnism is the same, even if the purposes underlying the two kinds of property are different.
- dbrian 14y agoPatents expire. The ownership of your house does not. We already have different rules for governing each.