Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 30th Jun 2012 19:34 UTC
Legal Yesterday, we were treated to another preliminary injunction on a product due to patent trolling. Over the past few years, some companies have resorted to patent trolling instead of competing on merit, using frivolous and obvious software and design patents to block competitors - even though this obviously shouldn't be legal. The fact that this is, in fact, legal, is baffling, and up until a few months ago, a regular topic here on OSNews. At some point - I stopped reporting on the matter. The reason for this is simple: I realised that intellectual property law exists outside of regular democratic processes and is, in fact, wholly and utterly totalitarian. What's the point in reporting on something we can't change via legal means?
Permalink for comment 524680
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Comment by BeamishBoy
by BeamishBoy on Sun 1st Jul 2012 14:52 UTC
BeamishBoy
Member since:
2010-10-27


This is where things start to go wrong. The WIPO is actually one of the 17 specialised agencies of the United Nations... [meaning] every member state's vote counted equally. This meant that in matters related to IP, the world's developing nations could exert far more influence than developed nations. You know, democracy at work at the international state level.


I have little time for software patents, particularly the frivolous ones. However, why exactly do you have a problem with, say, the US being against a system where their views count for as much as, say, Cape Verde? Surely the clearly democratic way in which such a system would work is one where the votes of individual countries are weighted in proportion to their population?

Edited 2012-07-01 14:52 UTC

Reply Score: 1