Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 8th Oct 2012 09:24 UTC
Legal The failing US patent system is getting ever more mainstream - The New York Times is running a long and details piece on the failings of the system, especially in relation to the technology industry most of us hold so dearly. Most of the stuff in there isn't new to us - but there's two things in the article I want to highlight.
Thread beginning with comment 537827
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
My two cents
by JoshuaS on Mon 8th Oct 2012 15:06 UTC
JoshuaS
Member since:
2011-09-15

In all honesty I think that abolishing the patent system would make things more difficult for small bussinesses. Large companies have so much money they can easily copy and obscurate a start-up.

No, what needs changing are the patent offices. The patent offices should start only granting patents for non-trivial idea's. (( Non-trivial could be defined as requiring considerable R&D costs ).

Lastly, we should not grant different property rights to different individuals and companies according to what gives us the most economic gain. An individual's ideas should be as much their property as their house. Equality matters.

Reply Score: 1

RE: My two cents
by Gullible Jones on Mon 8th Oct 2012 16:57 in reply to "My two cents"
Gullible Jones Member since:
2006-05-23

I honestly don't see how an idea can belong to anyone.

e.g. Newton and Leibniz discovered calculus independently, at roughly the same time. Archimedes, unknown to either, had also discovered a form of integral calculus much earlier. To which of them did the fundamental concepts belong?

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: My two cents
by JoshuaS on Mon 8th Oct 2012 17:13 in reply to "RE: My two cents"
JoshuaS Member since:
2011-09-15

Terrible conterexample. Is F = ma a product produced by a company? No. Patents aren't a tool to get a monopoly on applying a law of nature. They're on getting a monoply on a product you conceived. A good patent office would know this.

Reply Parent Score: 2