Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 6th Jul 2011 14:00 UTC
Permalink for comment 479919
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 22:43 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 21:50 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 22:15 UTC, submitted by Tom
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-07-06
I'm not sure Coke is covered by any patents, my guess is that the ingredients and how to mix them is a trade secret. In that case I guess you would be able to do it, at least as long as you don't call it Coca Cola.
If there are patents involved, that would not be possible, patents is all about not being the first having the idea. In other words you could see it as some form of limited monopoly on thinking, or at least on letting your thought take some more or less physical form, and I really can't see how this will be good for inventors or society.
If it was good for society how come the very people that are supposed to be experts on patent law, i.e. the lawyers don't use it on their own work. Just imagine how much the first lawyer using some form of insanity defence, could have made if he had had a patent on it. If he refused to license it he could take over all court cases where that type of defence was needed. If we can patent medical procedures why not extend it to legal procedures.
My guess is, the reason they haven't tried is that they realize that the legal system would fall apart if this was possible, just like the software industry is starting to do today.