On Tue, Nov 04, 2003 at 06:19:44PM -0600, Dan Minette wrote: > It's an old dispute between the Fool and myself that you may have > chosen to ignore. I'm all but certain (would bet $100 but not my > house) that he has stated that patents are evil and that things would > be better if they were eliminated. I'm pretty sure (bet $10 but not > $100) that these discussions occurred while you were onlist.
The reason I ask is because, as stated by you, that position is similar to mine. I'm not that extreme, but I do think (and have stated) that the patent system is way out of control now and that far too many patents are granted, and often should not have been granted (should as in, using the current standards properly if the examiner had done adequate research), and are virtually always for too long a term. I think the system would work much better if as few as 10% as many patents were granted as are now, and if the terms averaged less than 5 years (perhaps variable terms depending on the item and the quality of the invention). I also agree with the statement that people would still develop many things without IP protection. They already do, and in some areas I think government or educational institutions would actually be more efficient, in terms of using available resources and creating beneficial advances for everyone, than the current state of affairs. Some, but not all. -- Erik Reuter http://www.erikreuter.net/ _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
