Are you for or against patents?

For, but they need to be modified

4 (15.4%)

For, and they are just fine how they are

1 (3.8%)

Against

18 (69.2%)

Undecided

3 (11.5%)

Total Members Voted: 15

Voting closed: March 18, 2009, 02:46:02 PM

[Spideynw]

So, are you for or against patents?  If you are for patents, do you think they should be modified and how?

[Spideynw]

BTW, patents are just monopolies.

[NHArticleTen]

I like to use the example of the aircraft...

Say ten guys around the world have virtually the same design for a particular aircraft...only one can "patent" that design...and then the other nine are murdered if they try to put THEIR designs into production...

how is that "just" or "fair" or "free market"

much the same would be if I bought the first aircraft, reverse engineered it, and started building the same design...

the actual physical object/aircraft that I built...with my own materials, time, and labor...would be mine to dispose of as I, the producer, see fit...

no "patents"
no "intellectual property" either(how could you EVER know "who" really "thought" of it "first"...and why does it matter?)

enjoy!

[patrickj]

I think you could create a voluntary system of 'patents' that only served as a record of who created what when.  I do not support force being used upon those who violate this voluntary patent policy though. 

Sorta like underwriters laboratory certification, but not really. 

[YixilTesiphon]

Against, but I'm shaky on it.

[orion]

For, but they need to be modified:

Have independent patent "registries" where you can pay to have your idea logged so that there is a record of it. Perhaps the patent business will help you get investor connections for an extra fee.

EDIT: I am against force.

[Laetitia]

I completely misread this question at first... thought it said "parents".
Can't tell I'm on day three of sugar fueled long weekend with my kids, can ya?

I think what patrick had to say makes a lot of sense, and comes closer to explaining my opinion than I could in my present mental state (see note, above)

[NHArticleTen]

For, but they need to be modified:

Have independent patent "registries" where you can pay to have your idea logged so that there is a record of it. Perhaps the patent business will help you get investor connections for an extra fee.

EDIT: I am against force.

what would prevent multiple registrations of the same ideas/etc?

and then, since nothing would really prevent/preclude that...what's the point...really...

just build the shit and sell it...and refuse, repel, destroy, and eliminate any/all who attempt to restrict what you build....and what you do with it...

enjoy!

[velojym]

Being able to prove that you were "firstest with the mostest" could be a good tool for marketing, but relying on a bunch of
trigger-happy bureaucrats to subdue any possible competitors (whether or not they happened to create the same service/goods independently)
is just a bad idea.
Just because "we've" been doing it for ages doesn't make it any more right.

[Alex Libman]

Against, but I believe that in a free market many business entities would come to be contractually obligated to pay certain fees that would have a similar effect.

Imagine I run a diner, Big AL's Borshch Shack, and I have my super awesome borshch recipe that all my customers love.  The local beetroot farmers would probably find themselves selling a substantial fraction of their crop to me, and in order to get me to buy their stuff I may require that they get an Uncle Bill's Intellectual Property Alliance certification, which would create a contractual obligation for them not to sell to companies blacklisted by that authority. 

Now imagine Yixil Tesiphon's Borshchorama the next town over figures out my super awesome borshch recipe - oh horror!  Well, there's no government to protect my patent rights through violence, but I got all the major local producers of beets certified to respect property rights, so I get Uncle Bill to blacklist Yixil, and suddenly he's in for a world of hurt.  He has to import his beets from Ukrainistan, which reduces freshness and adds transportation costs.  Furthermore, he has to find a new accountant and trash pickup company for his company, because those found it in their best interest, based on the fact that many of their customers are interested in protecting property rights, to have a similar certification.  Etc.

So Yixil may do one of three things in this situation: (1) continue doing business through entities that aren't contractually obligated to boycott him, (2) stop using my borshch recipe and appeal to be taken off the blacklist, or (3) pay me to have Uncle Bill's Intellectual Property Alliance take him off the list.

[NHArticleTen]

Against, but I believe that in a free market many business entities would come to be contractually obligated to pay certain fees that would have a similar effect.

Imagine I run a diner, Big AL's Borshch Shack, and I have my super awesome borshch recipe that all my customers love.  The local beetroot farmers would probably find themselves selling a substantial fraction of their crop to me, and in order to get me to buy their stuff I may require that they get an Uncle Bill's Intellectual Property Alliance certification, which would create a contractual obligation for them not to sell to companies blacklisted by that authority. 

Now imagine Yixil Tesiphon's Borshchorama the next town over figures out my super awesome borshch recipe - oh horror!  Well, there's no government to protect my patent rights through violence, but I got all the major local producers of beets certified to respect property rights, so I get Uncle Bill to blacklist Yixil, and suddenly he's in for a world of hurt.  He has to import his beets from Ukrainistan, which reduces freshness and adds transportation costs.  Furthermore, he has to find a new accountant and trash pickup company for his company, because those found it in their best interest, based on the fact that many of their customers are interested in protecting property rights, to have a similar certification.  Etc.

So Yixil may do one of three things in this situation: (1) continue doing business through entities that aren't contractually obligated to boycott him, (2) stop using my borshch recipe and appeal to be taken off the blacklist, or (3) pay me to have Uncle Bill's Intellectual Property Alliance take him off the list.

I think the failure here is one person trying to stop someone else from thinking/writing/cooking/producing the same exact peanut-butter and jelly sandwich...

Here, you're trying to corner-the-market/monopolize your "code" for a particular mix of ingredients which, in a free market, would not be possible...

to wit, for your scenario to "work"...your suppliers would need to assert some sort of market-cornering on their products/services as well...

and so on...and so forth...

of course, it should be noted that...even when "other" people sang "beatles" songs...the crowds of shrieking fans didn't magically appear...just wasn't the Fab Four...

go figure...

enjoy!

[velojym]

And it doesn't happen now, but with government guns to back 'em up?

[CaL DaVe]

This is a really shaky subject for me. I think that people should be able to keep and be rewarded for their mental labor as well as the physical things they produce. However, the best thing for the human race in general is for all ideas to flow from one person to another so that everyone can build off the original idea. Saying that a physical object someone builds, such as a chair, is property, but an idea that takes 5 years for someone to come up with is not,  is quite a paradox.

Most people here would ask the question: "Why would I build a chair if anyone could just come and take it from me? Where is the incentive?" The same idea holds for IP. As a scientist, why figure out the theory behind cold fusion if a manufacturing company can take your theory, build a reactor and make a bazillion dollars without paying you a cent.

[Spideynw]

This is a really shaky subject for me. I think that people should be able to keep and be rewarded for their mental labor as well as the physical things they produce. However, the best thing for the human race in general is for all ideas to flow from one person to another so that everyone can build off the original idea. Saying that a physical object someone builds, such as a chair, is property, but an idea that takes 5 years for someone to come up with is not,  is quite a paradox.

Most people here would ask the question: "Why would I build a chair if anyone could just come and take it from me? Where is the incentive?" The same idea holds for IP. As a scientist, why figure out the theory behind cold fusion if a manufacturing company can take your theory, build a reactor and make a bazillion dollars without paying you a cent.

People come up with new ideas because of competition.  People do not just come up with ideas all by themselves.  They use the ideas of others, and build upon those.  If I own a car making business, do I try to come up with ideas to make my product safer, faster, more reliable, better looking, etc., etc. because of patents or because of competition?  The answer is obviously competition.  However, what patents do do is make it so that when someone figures out some way to make their car safer, I cannot copy it, resulting in a loss to the consumer, as they now do not have as many safe products to choose from.

People build chairs because of property rights, not because of competition.

If you are going to defend patents, then you have to defend the time limit.  But you cannot, because it is completely arbitrary.  And in fact, I am sure the longer the length of time, the more you would oppose it, because you recognize that it is really a monopoly, and stifles competition.  But that is what it does from day one.

[CaL DaVe]

This is a really shaky subject for me. I think that people should be able to keep and be rewarded for their mental labor as well as the physical things they produce. However, the best thing for the human race in general is for all ideas to flow from one person to another so that everyone can build off the original idea. Saying that a physical object someone builds, such as a chair, is property, but an idea that takes 5 years for someone to come up with is not,  is quite a paradox.

Most people here would ask the question: "Why would I build a chair if anyone could just come and take it from me? Where is the incentive?" The same idea holds for IP. As a scientist, why figure out the theory behind cold fusion if a manufacturing company can take your theory, build a reactor and make a bazillion dollars without paying you a cent.

People come up with new ideas because of competition.  People do not just come up with ideas all by themselves.  They use the ideas of others, and build upon those.  If I own a car making business, do I try to come up with ideas to make my product safer, faster, more reliable, better looking, etc., etc. because of patents or because of competition?  The answer is obviously competition.  However, what patents do do is make it so that when someone figures out some way to make their car safer, I cannot copy it, resulting in a loss to the consumer, as they now do not have as many safe products to choose from.

People build chairs because of property rights, not because of competition.

If you are going to defend patents, then you have to defend the time limit.  But you cannot, because it is completely arbitrary.  And in fact, I am sure the longer the length of time, the more you would oppose it, because you recognize that it is really a monopoly, and stifles competition.  But that is what it does from day one.

I don't know the answer to this one. Your arguments are good and I tried to make some of your same points in my jumbled post earlier when I said what is best for humanity is to let all ideas flow freely. I just feel like that scenario enables the collective world to benifit while the individual gets screwed. Something in me just feels like the person who comes up with the idea should be rewarded for the breakthrough.

But then again, what if we were all cavemen and you invented a way to make fire from rocks? I would copy that idea in a heartbeat! Screw IP!

Like I said, I just don't know on this one.