2 ms·
> In Europe, industrialisation depended on the dissemination of ideas. The more know-how was spread widely, the more people could hear of an innovation and coul
by higherpurpose 13y ago
> In Europe, industrialisation depended on the dissemination of ideas. The more know-how was spread widely, the more people could hear of an innovation and could copy or improve it, building an accelerating cycle of technological development.
This hits the spot for the patent system, which is actually detrimental as it is for technological development. Imagine if back then the "big guys" could sue/take the property of anyone daring to copy or improve on existing technologies? I also doubt that back then many would be interested in licensing the technology, but more in keeping it for themselves to "rule the world".
- claudius 13y agoThe patent system was introduced to solve the latter problem: By openly specifying a solution to a problem, more people could benefit from that solution. Combine that with a period of time where only the original inventor is allowed to benefit and you catch two birds with one stone: - invention is incentivised as people can expect to be protected for a period of time to get their investment back - to do so, they have to share their inventions with the world which then can use it at a later point. The problem today is that the period of protection is much longer than necessary and sensible given the speed of innovation. Just a few decades ago, waiting ten or twenty years for a patent to run out was much preferable to spending ten, twenty or fifty years trying to solve the original problem yourself. The patent system is not the problem, its parameters are.