[ExI] Problem with Pattents

ablainey at aol.com ablainey at aol.com
Fri Feb 22 14:39:04 UTC 2008




>-----Original Message-----
>From: Kaj Sotala <xuenay at gmail.com>

>On 2/22/08, ABlainey at aol.com <ABlainey at aol.com> wrote:
>> I have been thinking recently about patents and whether they are
>> fundamentally wrong. As an inventor I have no problem with people getting
>I don't know about "fundamentally wrong", but they do slow down
>innovation. http://www.dklevine.com/papers/ip.ch.1.m1004.pdf has a
>nice historical example about how the patent system put off the
>industrial revolution for a couple of decades.

Perhaps 'fundamentally wrong' is not appropriate? 
my simple logic goes:
The patent system is to give credit(recognition), protection and renumeration to the 'Inventor'
1)The inventer must have sufficient funds to pay for the patent
2)The inventer may be working as an employee of a company, so he usually does not get credit and rarely profits except continued employment.
3)For any protection action to be made, the inventor needs further funds for a legal fight.

So as I see it, the inventor has to be in a pretty specific situation in order for the system to work. Mainly based upon finances.

Thanks for the link, I haven't read it yet, but i'm wondering if any delay caused by the patent system is giving 'compound interest'?
Should the singularity have occured decades ago?



AOL's new homepage has launched. Take a tour at http://info.aol.co.uk/homepage/ now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20080222/607be322/attachment.html>

More information about the extropy-chat mailing list