Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: [News] Patents Look Like a 'Pyramid Scheme' by Lawyers, for Lawyers

Hash: SHA1

____/ 7 on Thursday 19 Nov 2009 19:03 : \____

> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>> Hash: SHA1
>> Australian Patent Lawyers Claim Patenting Genes Is Necessary For
>> Biomedical Research
>> ,----[ Quote ]
>> | This is, of course, ridiculous. First of
>> | all, much of the research on these things
>> | is often done via government and
>> | university funding -- and it's often done
>> | for reasons other than locking up a
>> | monopoly on the technique. Reasons such as
>> | helping people live better lives (*gasp*
>> | -- what a concept!). Or, more to the
>> | point, it's done so that firms can sell an
>> | actual product. If they have to compete in
>> | the marketplace, that's a good thing, as
>> | it pushes them to be more efficient and
>> | offer a better overall service, rather
>> | than just jacking up prices. And how do
>> | they offer a better overall service? Oh
>> | yeah, often by continuing to do more
>> | research and creating new breakthroughs.
>> | 
>> | These sorts of claims of industries
>> | collapsing are moral panics and folk
>> | devils put forth by patent attorneys who
>> | are really afraid that it's going to hurt
>> | their own business.
>> `----
>> http://techdirt.com/articles/20091105/1133206816.shtml
> The patent system needs to be overhauled.
> When lawyers are involved, they will go for
> every minutia of argument to lengthen the whole
> thing. With copyright, most of these kinds
> of issues are mute. What we need is something
> as good as copyright that doesn't need the
> hands of lawyers to get involved except in serious
> infringement cases.
> It shouldn't be first to invent.
> The word invent should be removed altogether.
> It should be first person to offer a license.
> After offering your license publicly, the government collects
> money for you and from all those who it thinks
> should be paying for a license.
> A second person to license the same thing gets nothing of course
> because the government will decide what it is
> the licensors are licensing and who offered that
> license up to the government first.
> Governments become richer.
> Inventors become richer.
> Companies become richer because they don't
> waste time negotiating. They just get a flat
> 2%-5% bill added to their business tax
> equally and fairly across all competing
> businesses and only which is only dependent on the number
> of products sold.
> Even if you are the inventor, you pay the same fees.
> That makes it absolutely fair on every business
> that is competing in the market place.

There are other ideas thrown around; yours is better than the status quo, which
is easy to beat.

- -- 
		~~ Best of wishes

I'm picturing Windows NT jamming a network backbone going 'la la la la I can't
hear you la la la la la' -- Graham Reed
http://Schestowitz.com  | Mandriva Linux |     PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
 02:00:01 up 2 days, 23:23,  2 users,  load average: 1.34, 0.78, 0.72
      http://iuron.com - help build a non-profit search engine
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index