decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
Software patents, mp3 in particular... | 225 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Software patents, mp3 in particular...
Authored by: Gringo_ on Monday, May 20 2013 @ 09:55 AM EDT

Again, I'm not arguing that the patent system is fit for purpose... but the idea is a good one. The problem is that the bar is set too low for obtaining a patent and too high to defend against one, and this makes gaming the system more profitable than following its intent.

.

...and there are many other problems I'm sure you would admit to as well.

Then let us agree with you for a moment that some ideal patent system would promote innovation. Is it possible to come up with a practical, real world system that would actually work as desired?

I submit to you that in well over 100 years of experimentation we haven't managed to even come close to such a system as you visualize. For every "success", where the system has promoted innovation, there have been ten, a hundred, a thousand failures, where it hindered innovation. Cases where it facilitated injustices.

My background is both electronics and software development. To give you a historical perspective, I once watched a wonderful series on the discovery of electricity, right from the beginning generating electrostatic charges, on to Faraday and Hertz, on to Edison and DC versus AC for general distribution of power, and on to patent battles around commercialization of radio waves and power distribution. It seemed to me right from the dawn of the patent system that it was being gamed by those with wealth and power. I wish I could remember all the examples now. For example, the great inventors who's names we associate with key inventions are often people who stole ideas from the real inventor.

In summary, the ones who ended up with key patents historically were often the most aggressive and ruthless, if not the richest and most powerful. The true inventors often got screwed.

Now moving on to modern times, we see the patent system has grown more corrupted and dysfunctional as time progressed, until today it is on the verge of collapse.

I submit to you that in the real world, it is impossible to design a system that works. Our institutions can only be a reflection of the creator of those institutions - we ourselves, imperfect as we are. If we had the will and could make the investment in time and energy and form the consensus necessary to create a better system, it will still be imperfect. It will still leak injustices.

Then we need to look at what kind of world would we have with no patents. You, for example, could probably immediately raise examples of outcomes that would be less than ideal. I submit that whatever would happen, it can't be worse that supporting a huge bureaucracy called a patent system. Think about the cost of this.

In some ways, copyrights are a similar to patents. They are causing us many problems. The copyright system is just as corrupted as the patent system. It is just as much in need of fixing. However, there remains one section of industry that is not eligible for copyrights - fashion design. Because designers cannot get copyrights to their designs, fashion as an industry is a total failure. As soon as you come out with a new dress, it is copied by others and you have no recourse. Of course the fashion design industry just never took off because of this. nobody makes any money in it, because there is just no incentive to innovate. Unfortunately, we all have to wear drab, uninspired clothes because nobody is going to invest in an industry where there is no copyright protection granted. Furthermore, as we know, this sector generates almost no employment. It adds nothing to the GDP. There is no spin offs like magazine coverage or upscale stores selling the latest fashions because there are none. Nobody in their right mind is going to invest in it!

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

As a software engineer ...
Authored by: cjk fossman on Monday, May 20 2013 @ 05:55 PM EDT
you need to rethink your position on patents because you are
advocating against your own interests.

Under any patent system, you are far more likely to be harmed
by the patent system than to benefit from it.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )