|
| Authored by: albert on Thursday, May 02 2013 @ 05:49 PM EDT |
Jacksons post is rhetoric and hand waving. It reminds me of the pro-software
patent rhetoric we see so often.
Genes should not be patentable. (as RAS pointed out, 'no human body part', to
which I add 'no part of any living thing')
Software should not be patentable.
These seem obvious to me. Simple solutions to complex problems.
We started down this slippery slope with codec/encryption patents. Apparently,
any objections to those codec/encryptions patents failed, and the system got
worse.
The same thing is happening with gene patents. Software is one thing, but
monopolies on medical diagnostics is quite another. These can be life or death
issues.
AKAIK, bogo-patents are being issued in _all_ fields of endeavor.
The endgame is stagnation, entropy, and the death of innovation.
Now everyone wants to patent everything, and the USPTO is happy to oblige.
What happened to pure research?
Maybe we need government funded, patent-free, royalty-free research programs. I
like the idea of assigning one project to one company, let them develop it using
pooled funds, then, after a short time(depending on the tech), let everyone duke
it out in the market. No licensing, royalties, patents, or litigation.
For example, Company A develops a new kind of power transistor, which it will
use in its products. After 1 one year period, they must release the technology.
Other companies may develop the same product, or, perhaps just buy the product
from Company A. Maybe Company B can make it better, faster, cheaper. Perhaps A
will buy from B.
No patents required.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, May 02 2013 @ 09:45 PM EDT |
Change:
At point does the human body suddenly be labled "not
human"?
to:
At what point does the human body suddenly become
labled "not human"?
RAS[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
