The patent system.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
04-11-2013, 01:16 PM (This post was last modified: 04-11-2013 01:32 PM by earmuffs.)
The patent system.
Because I think it's a discussion worth having on it's own. (and because I didn't read everything said on the topic in the other thread).

In my opinion the patent system is outdated and flawed.
It's abused by big corporation and people after a quick buck (ie: getting a patient on someone else's patent in a different country and waiting for that person to come to your country and than have to fight you (in court) for legal rights to use their own bloody product..) alike. It worked great in the 1800's but not today.

In fact if anything it's probably hindering innovation and progress. If you give a company exclusive rights to produce something for 10, 25, 50 years than they have a monopoly on that product (which is bad) and no progress is made towards improving that product as they have a monopoly and there's no need.

If you do away with the patient system than it opens up designs to be really refined and made as best as possible because only the best version of the product will win out.
And example of this would be Chas's software. No doubt Chas is a supporter of the patent system (all assumption here) because he uses it for his software.
BUT what if Chas's software is of low quality (not saying it is)?
If he has a patent on it than customers are forced to use his low quality software.
Whereas without the patient system, competition can arise and take Chas's concept and improve it and sell a higher quality version of Chas's product.
This forces Chas to ensure that his product is of sufficient quality to begin with or for him to improve his product.

IMO, copyright and trade mark law is sufficient. Copyright law would stop people just flat out coping Chas's software, but it wouldn't stop competition and thus improve quality.
There's also several other factors that IMO would keep the market inventing new things (with the biggest scare of getting rid of the patent system being that noone will invent anything new). One being 'first to market advantage'.

Opinions?

[Image: 3cdac7eec8f6b059070d9df56f50a7ae.jpg]
Now with 40% more awesome.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like earmuffs's post
04-11-2013, 01:28 PM
RE: The patient system.
Do you mean patient or patent?

[Image: dobie.png]

Science is the process we've designed to be responsible for generating our best guess as to what the fuck is going on. Girly Man
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-11-2013, 01:33 PM
RE: The patent system.
(04-11-2013 01:28 PM)Dom Wrote:  Do you mean patient or patent?

yea, that's what I said.. patent..

[Image: ShiftyEyes.gif]

[Image: 3cdac7eec8f6b059070d9df56f50a7ae.jpg]
Now with 40% more awesome.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes earmuffs's post
04-11-2013, 01:36 PM
RE: The patent system.
Well, I thought you were going to talk about healthcare - fuck it, I'm out of here. Drinking Beverage

A new type of thinking is essential if mankind is to survive and move to higher levels. ~ Albert Einstein
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-11-2013, 01:37 PM
RE: The patient system.
(04-11-2013 01:16 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  In my opinion the patient system is outdated and flawed.
It's abused by big corporation and people after a quick buck (ie: getting a patient on someone else's patient in a different country and waiting for that person to come to your country and than have to fight you (in court) for legal rights to use their own bloody product..) alike. It worked great in the 1800's but not today.

What's all this I hear about the patient system ?
I also think we should not be patients of big corporations, and should be able to choose our own doctors. I certainly do not want to be a patient on someone else's patient, (unless they are VERY cute), and having to use other patient's "bloody products" is truly disgusting. I want to be a patient on my own patient. But if my patients have "bloody products" they probably need to go to surgery, and then they HAVE to be someone's else's patient. Makes sense. Weeping

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-11-2013, 01:39 PM
RE: The patent system.
Agree 1 million % with everything you said.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-11-2013, 01:58 PM
RE: The patent system.
(04-11-2013 01:16 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  Because I think it's a discussion worth having on it's own. (and because I didn't read everything said on the topic in the other thread).

In my opinion the patent system is outdated and flawed.
It's abused by big corporation and people after a quick buck (ie: getting a patient on someone else's patent in a different country and waiting for that person to come to your country and than have to fight you (in court) for legal rights to use their own bloody product..) alike. It worked great in the 1800's but not today.

In fact if anything it's probably hindering innovation and progress. If you give a company exclusive rights to produce something for 10, 25, 50 years than they have a monopoly on that product (which is bad) and no progress is made towards improving that product as they have a monopoly and there's no need.

If you do away with the patient system than it opens up designs to be really refined and made as best as possible because only the best version of the product will win out.
And example of this would be Chas's software. No doubt Chas is a supporter of the patent system (all assumption here) because he uses it for his software.
BUT what if Chas's software is of low quality (not saying it is)?
If he has a patent on it than customers are forced to use his low quality software.
Whereas without the patient system, competition can arise and take Chas's concept and improve it and sell a higher quality version of Chas's product.
This forces Chas to ensure that his product is of sufficient quality to begin with or for him to improve his product.

IMO, copyright and trade mark law is sufficient. Copyright law would stop people just flat out coping Chas's software, but it wouldn't stop competition and thus improve quality.
There's also several other factors that IMO would keep the market inventing new things (with the biggest scare of getting rid of the patent system being that noone will invent anything new). One being 'first to market advantage'.

Opinions?

S'not quite coherent yet, muffs.

You say patents are out... and yet you explicitly provide for guarantees of intellectual property in some form (copyrights and trademarks).

So you'd have to be much clearer on the issues you have with the existing body of patent law specifically as opposed to intellectual property rights in general, before you'd really have a thesis going.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-11-2013, 02:05 PM
RE: The patent system.
(04-11-2013 01:58 PM)cjlr Wrote:  S'not quite coherent yet, muffs.

You say patents are out... and yet you explicitly provide for guarantees of intellectual property in some form (copyrights and trademarks).

So you'd have to be much clearer on the issues you have with the existing body of patent law specifically as opposed to intellectual property rights in general, before you'd really have a thesis going.

It's perfectly coherent. @earmuffs just assumes you already understand the differences between copyrights and trademarks, which are rather clear-cut and easy to prove, vs. patents, which particularly today are broad, general, vague concepts so it's very difficult to know what even IS an invention, and if it's actually unique and original and patent-able. So the PTO, particularly in the 90's, just threw up its hands and stamped everything 'approved'. And now the courts are left to sort it out and it's a total nightmare that's costing the economy $30 billion just in legal fees. Copyright and trademark are much less frequent, and nearly always simple, clear-cut cases that can be resolved accordingly.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes frankksj's post
04-11-2013, 02:10 PM
RE: The patent system.
(04-11-2013 01:33 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  
(04-11-2013 01:28 PM)Dom Wrote:  Do you mean patient or patent?

yea, that's what I said.. patent..

[Image: ShiftyEyes.gif]

Pfft, sneaky editing Tongue

[Image: dobie.png]

Science is the process we've designed to be responsible for generating our best guess as to what the fuck is going on. Girly Man
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-11-2013, 02:25 PM
RE: The patent system.
(04-11-2013 02:05 PM)frankksj Wrote:  
(04-11-2013 01:58 PM)cjlr Wrote:  S'not quite coherent yet, muffs.

You say patents are out... and yet you explicitly provide for guarantees of intellectual property in some form (copyrights and trademarks).

So you'd have to be much clearer on the issues you have with the existing body of patent law specifically as opposed to intellectual property rights in general, before you'd really have a thesis going.

It's perfectly coherent. @earmuffs just assumes you already understand the differences between copyrights and trademarks, which are rather clear-cut and easy to prove, vs. patents, which particularly today are broad, general, vague concepts so it's very difficult to know what even IS an invention, and if it's actually unique and original and patent-able. So the PTO, particularly in the 90's, just threw up its hands and stamped everything 'approved'. And now the courts are left to sort it out and it's a total nightmare that's costing the economy $30 billion just in legal fees. Copyright and trademark are much less frequent, and nearly always simple, clear-cut cases that can be resolved accordingly.

Oh so that "just threw up their hands and stamped everything 'approved' ", must be the reason it actually takes more than two years to get the first action on any patent filed in the US. Of course it does. Yup . Sure.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: