[ExI] Problem with Pattents

Rafal Smigrodzki rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com
Mon Feb 25 23:33:05 UTC 2008

On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 11:58 AM,  <ablainey at aol.com> wrote:
> Exactly, I can see no logical reason for inventors to get a free lunch after
> the recouping of the invention cost.

### The proposal to tie IP to the cost of making it is an old canard.
Basically, if you reward the cost (rather than usefulness) of
invention, you get a lot of cost but not that much usefulness. It is
exactly the reason why paying workers by the hour is frequently more
expensive than paying by the unit of work done.

> My plumber doesn't ask me for a check every time I turn on the water, just
> because he worked hard at the outset.

### Only because there are other plumbers ready to offer you a good
deal if he gets too greedy. Why is this so difficult to see it in my
proposal - I want to allow re-invention, allow making *other
inventors* to provide competitive pricing! Did I describe the proposal
clumsily? Didn't this notion come across?

> Might I propose a 'united world invention registry'. Where every new
> patentable device can be registered for free by the original inventor.
> Anyone could browse the director for a device which fits their need and the
> specs downloaded. Manufacturers could register themselves against a device
>  and the registry updated with how many working examples of that device have
> been manufactured/sold etc.
> If the cost of invention could somehow be factored against market usage and
> reimbursed accordingly to the inventor (or company paying for the
> development).

### Yeah, that "somehow", this little word has killed many great ideas.

> Perhaps some kind of feedback point system could be used which accounts for
> the quality of the invention in quantifiable ways?

### The market? The price mechanism? No? "Something" better?


More information about the extropy-chat mailing list