3 ms·
To take the counter-argument, do these things really need the protection of patents then? Wouldn't the situation be better for the user if minor innovations of
by tempestn 13y ago
To take the counter-argument, do these things really need the protection of patents then? Wouldn't the situation be better for the user if minor innovations of this sort could be borrowed, and companies instead needed to continue innovating in order to differentiate their products?
I could see a short protection period for things like this, but the magnitude of current protections seems extreme.
- Tyrannosaurs 13y agoI agree - my personal preference is for reform of the patent system to provide a higher bar for what can be patented (actively used by the owner in a current product, evidence of significant investment to get there, significantly non-obvious and so on) and a shorter period (three to five years except in exceptional circumstances). But that's a somewhat different argument - the original point was that consumers were being significantly impacted and I don't think this shows that. To my mind the biggest impact may be coming from FRAND patents, the terms of which don't have to be particularly fair or reasonable and as such can easily be used to block new entrants. To my mind FRAND patents should have transparent licensing terms which are common to every licensee whether you be a major multinational or a two man start up.