Slashdot Mirror
More Calls for Patent Reform
ibi writes "On the heels of the PriceWaterHouseCoopers report about the threat of SoftPats to innovation, comes a book by a Harvard B School and Brandeis economics professor about how broken the patent system is in general. In short their book argues that the entire system is a (stunned silence) scam. (They actually call it 'a creator of litigation and uncertainty that threatens the innovation process itself' instead but that's cause you don't get tenure for using words like 'scam'.) Interesting to see that its gotten so bad that a professor of Investment Banking at Harvard even thinks something oughta be done."
At least he used "that's" correctly.
"...that's cause you don't get tenure for using words like 'scam'."
And they told me it was because I didn't have the necessary education, experience, publications, or ability.
There are lots of things that are difficult, if not impossible (some would say all things) to prevent the reverse engineering of.
A lot of time and effort is expended in the development of patentable inventions, and if somebody wants to benefit from it, why stop them?
It's true that the patent system in the short term stifles innovation, and certainly slows innovation down in a direct sense. On the other hand, it gives financial incentive to do the inventing in the first place. (I know other incentives exist, but unless there's financial, most people can't afford to invent full time.) Additionally, the design of anything that's patented must be fully disclosed and on the public record, meaning that there is no secrecy involved on the part of the inventor, allowing others to improve the design, even while the patent is still valid, and license the improvement to the original inventor, license the rights to sell the original invention with the improvement, or to wait for the expiration of the first patent and then sell their improvement.
The difficulty in the patent system is not inherent, though certainly, one can admire men like Benjamin Franklin who did not patent his inventions. The problem with the patent system is that often inventions that should be considered "obvious", and therefore exempt from being patented, are not, and are patented. Of course, these can be contested, but it's arduous, and hardly worth the time against a megacorp.
Unfortunately, the resources do not exist for true experts to check every patent application thoroughly.
(My) Conclusion: the patent system is not inherently bad, it just has problems of Pragmatism.
I don't know if you can patent sex. But if someone tries to patent gayness, you can certainly submit your post as prior art...
Just remove the safety labels off things and let the problem solve itself. within a generation or two, perhaps COMMON SENSE will have been rekindled in that dark dark hole of lawyers that is the USA
Far better I think, to fight for your freedom in a mediated, structured system of combat.
This would never work. Athletes (such as O.J. Simpson) would excel and never be "found guilty" of their crimes...
You forget we program the voting machines.
I will patent the concept of patent reform, and stop them!!!!BWAHAHAHA!!!!
Who else read this as "Moore Calls for Patent Reform" ????