Microsoft Pushes For Single Global Patent System

Xerolooper writes "What would the world be like if everyone could enjoy the same patent system we use in the USA? From the article: 'A senior lawyer at Microsoft is calling for the creation of a global patent system to make it easier and faster for corporations to enforce their intellectual property rights around the world.' They have already attracted opposition from the open-source community and the Pirate Party. According to the article, the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) will be meeting in Geneva on the 17th and 18th of September."

Comments

nightmares

[blackraven14250]

...why does it seem like every nightmare I have relating to patents and copyrights comes true?

Re:nightmares

[Runaway1956]

How about we clean up the patent system inside the US before we push our system outside of the US?

Seriously, almost everything Microsoft has ever owned or claimed to own properly belonged under COPYRIGHT law. They may hold a small handful of valid patents - like, keyboard and mouse, maybe?

MS needs to shut up and go sit in the corner, or surrender most of their patents as an example of how things SHOULD be.

Re:nightmares

[Stormwatch]

How about we clean up the patent system inside the US before we push our system outside of the US?

You mean, like... abolishing the whole "intellectual property" bullshit?

Re:nightmares

[pthreadunixman]

Your entire post rests entirely on unfalsifiable statements, conjecture and unsubstantiated claims about evidence.

Re:nightmares

[horatiocain]

Those opposing patents and IP in general often claim that inventions would still be generated in the absence of IP protection, and that might be true for some inventions, while most require hughe amounts of R&D that simply wouldn't happen if the money wasn't there.

I think you might be hitting a 'reverse accident' fallacy here. Just because some inventions occured in the presence of IP protection does not imply that, in the absense of IP protection, nothing would ever be invented. Plenty of fields and markets thrive without IP entering into them.

There are conceivable models other than our own. Don't let the haters convince you otherwise.

Re:nightmares

[TheRaven64]

Odd, I regard the grace period, and the first-to-invent system of which it is a side-effect, as some of the worst features of the US patent system. The entire point of patents is to encourage disclosure. If you have already disclosed, then society gains nothing by granting you a monopoly on your invention. This system in the USA means that your best bet is often to keep your invention secret, wait for someone else to invent it independently, and only then file the patent. You can even wait until they file the patent (see TI Vs Intel) and then produce notebooks showing that you thought of it first. If you do this in most of the world, it just invalidates their patent application. If you do it in the USA, you get the patent.

Re:nightmares

[Mongoose Disciple]

Wouldn't it make more sense to have patents expire after the research costs have been recovered?

What if I put money into researching 100 different ideas, but only one of them is a "winner"? If I can recover my research costs for all of them, probably we've got "Hollywood accounting" problems. If I can only recover my research costs for the one, probably it's not worth my money to invest in research.

I think the problem with the patent system in general is that it ends up having to try to straddle similar lines (and fails). It's ultimately good for everyone if research and innovation are financially encouraged, but a flawed patent system can also stifle innovation.

Re:nightmares

[sqldr]

"if I come up with a truly original idea, I feel that I should be permitted to make money from it,"

What if you came up with that idea whilst trying to solve a problem, only to find that someone solving the same problem came up with the same idea, patented it, but then didn't personally phone you to point out that solving that problem is now illegal, and just sues you for doing the world a favour?

Global patent system?

[MartinSchou]

How about the companies give us something first - like a push for a global taxation system, so that companies cannot just set up shell offices in tax havens, or threaten to leave a country/state because some other country/state has cheaper taxes?

But that'd be unfair of course. To the companies I mean.

Obviously one system doesn't fit all - unless it's something that benefits the companies.

Re:Global patent system?

[Trepidity]

There are plenty of people who're taxed but not able to vote. Non-citizen permanent residents, those under 18, convicted felons, etc., all must still pay taxes. Do you propose exempting them all from taxes as well?

Re:Global patent system?

[xigxag]

And furthermore, corporations do get representation through their right to hire lobbyists and establish political action committees. Let's not kid ourselves. In any reasonable interpretation of the notion, any major corporation gets far more "representation" than the average natural person, despite being barred from voting.

Push for proper patent reform

[syousef]

While we're at it.

- No more than 7 years on a patent. No extensions. No exceptions.
- No patenting of algorithms
- Patents to be awarded to individuals only, not companies

Re:Push for proper patent reform

[0xdeadbeef]

Say goodbye to a lot of software inventions.

And say hello to the far greater number of inventions so far unrealized because of the legal expense and danger.

Re:Push for proper patent reform

[syousef]

I'd love to see the economics research behind that number. Must have been a lot of work determining the optimal patent term. I suspect it'll be no trouble getting published. Or, as is more likely, was that arbitrary number pulled out of the air?

Just as arbitrary as the current numbers, you troll.

As for 'no extensions. no exceptions,' what about delays brought about by the patent office? Surely you wouldn't penalize the inventor for bureaucratic incompetence?

So in your model bureaucratic incompetence is inevitable. Fantastic.

This is already the case in the US. Patents can be assigned to companies, but only individuals can apply for and receive them. ...and plenty of employment contracts stipulate that you MUST assign them. Effectively the company owns the patent, which should never be the case.

Algorithms are already unpatentable. An algorithm, alone, is not useful, and so it fails the requirement of utility. What is patentable is, according to the Federal Circuit, the use of an algorithm tied to a particular machine to accomplish a useful result. I suspect the Supreme Court will probably overrule the Federal Circuit and allow the patenting of the practical application of algorithms.

Are you done defending a system that gave us patents on such brilliant algorithms as "one click"?

I suppose you meant that companies should be prevented from owning patents at all, but that would be pointless. Employees would simply be required to license the invention to the company exclusively. It would only add transaction costs.

Unless of course you make such exclusive licensing illegal.

Borg

[orzetto]

The Bill Gates as Borg icon was never more appropriate.

Deal.

[FlyingBishop]

If you reduce software patent terms to 5 years.

Re:Deal.

[FlyingBishop]

And no grandfather clauses.

Cause and Effect?

[Monkeedude1212]

Is this because the Canadian firm (i4i) hit it big on an American company (Microsoft) with their patent trolling?

Do they think this is going to make it better? Now its going to be a MASSIVE convoluted state of patents EVERYWHERE and everyone will be stepping on someones toes. The idea of a Patent Law being forced across the ENTIRE PLANET is ridiculous.

We haven't even reached World Peace, how do you expect to enforce Patent Laws in warzones, 3rd world countries, embassies?

Good Luck with China

[lobiusmoop]

Not exactly the most IP-compliant country in the world, and pretty much has the USA over a barrel economically right now from the look of things.

Global laws

[Fractal Dice]

I assume all the same logic applies to global labor laws, a global minimum wage and global tax rate?

If you're going to have a global patent system

[99luftballon]

At least pick one that works.

Sure, if my country controls it

[DaveGod]

I expect every nation that thinks it is going to host the HQ of any such organisation will be all for it. But not so much when they realise the entire patents system would be controlled by foreign nations. At an individual level, I don't give a shit what is patented in the US. Unless I do something over there, you don't have ANY claim to authority over me. But if my country has chosen to patent that specific thing then OK, I'll respect that, I use my authority as a citizen to grant them that authority over me (by that same token, I quite rightly do not have any say over what is patented in the US).

A patent is an agreement between an "inventor" (sadly, needing to use the term very loosely) and society. The inventor offers details of the invention in return to society granting the inventor specific rights for a specified period of time. Therefore it follows that the society upholding the rights be the one agreeing to it, as closely as practicable.

I see plenty arguments here that favour the inventor, but nothing to restore balance by favouring society - unless you accept "enrich public knowledge" (knowledge that they cannot do much with) or "encourage competition" (competition in submitting patents that is).

Furthermore the national system works quite well in limiting excessive scope. Presently it is only worth an inventor obtaining a patent in a country he has some intention to trade in. With a global system, he would obtain a patent whether he intends to trade there or not.

Ugh.

[dskoll]

The problem is that if a global patent system were devised that were more sane than the US system, the US would say "screw you; we won't tolerate this violation of our sovereignty" and continue with it's own broken patent system.

So a global patent system is guaranteed to be no better than the US system, and likely to be worse.

Re:Advantages for Inventors and Small Businesses

[marco.antonio.costa]

What makes you think that a global system would be cheaper?

Bigger bureaucracy == more expensive bureaucracy.

There is a Little Problem Called Sovereignty

[CodeBuster]

Neither patents nor copyrights nor indeed any other laws would not exist or have any weight without the military might of nations to back them up. For those of you out there who maintain the pleasant fiction of "international law" just remember that at any time a sovereign nation can always appeal to the court of last resort, or as Cicero put it: silent enim leges inter arma. International law is a useful fiction that nations maintain as long as it suits common interests. However, it has no force without the sword, and the willingness to use the sword, to back it up.