Original Message: ----------------- From: John Williams jwilliams4...@gmail.com Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 10:56:01 -0700 To: brin-l@mccmedia.com Subject: Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 7:01 AM, Dan M<dsummersmi...@comcast.net> wrote: >> John, would you agree that some sort of community system, like the courts, >> are necessary to resolve disputes over true ownership of property, >> contracts, and the like? >Necessary, no, I can imagine alternatives that might be practical, at >least on a small scale. But desirable, yes, I think it is a good idea >to have some sort of government justice system to settle contractual >and legal disagreements. I've never met anyone who thinks that a free >market means total anarchy. A free market simply means that people are >free to enter into agreements with others. If these agreements are >formalized into a contract, then it is a good idea to have some way -- >that all parties agree is fair -- to enforce the contract. I think a >government controlled enforcement system is a good idea, since I >suspect that any privately run enforcement system would be more likely >to be suborned than a government controlled system. I thought you'd say that, it's a reasonable position. But, I know from personal experience, that one of the main tactics of Fortune 500 corporations is to game the legal system in order to take the property of others. I'll give three examples from personal experience. Yes, these are individual stories, but since the number of personal connections I have is limited....it gives a much better measure of what actually happens than stories that are told by people who sample all possible stories of what has happened in the US. #1. Friends of mine invented geosteering. They signed away their rights to the patent as a matter of employment....it's a pre-requsite and not really the problem I'm talking about. A competitor patented something that, by law, they could not patent. They couldn't because they had disclosed it before the patent. The company they, and I worked for, patented this geosteering technique. If the law were enforced properly, our former employer would get 5% royalties for the use of the patented technique, while paying nothing for the invention of the other company. But, as things ususally go, it's not what reality is; it's how good your lawyers are and how big you are. Our employers were rolled and ended up paying for a bogus patent and getting $0.00 for their own patent. One emperical fact that butresses this is the fact that the most junior patent lawyer makes far more than the top inventor. The problem is sometimes corruption. But, even with a non-corrupt system, the judge is does not "possess ordinary skill in the art." The value of a patent is not fact based, but how well you can convince a judges. Sure, there is the occasional exception, like variable wiper blades, which make great movies. But, that is the exception. Even patent examiners, who have to be engineers, do not know enough about the fields they judge to seperate the wheat from the chaff. #2. I sat on a Fortune 500 company's patent commitee for 7 years. I listened very carefullly when senior legal council spoke. The said flat out "our policy is to use our muscle to roll anyone small who has a patent claim....they can't stand up to us." They all but admitted that they would fold before anyone bigger. #3. One of the two key inventors asked for a raise. He was laughed at to his face "who'd hire you" was the quote. It turned out that this company, and the other two companies in the field had an agreement to honor each others illegal restriction on workers. Now, it was illegal to restrict employment....after the employee spent his life savings in court he could get that ruling....but it was legal to honor such restrictions. #4. You might argue that this would be a perfect place for a start-up. It was. They were hired by a start-up and promply sued for millions for theft of intellectual property. The property was everything they knew. After a couple of years, and > 10 million dollars, a deal was reached. The startup would hire no more people who had been employed by the suing company and the charges would be dropped. They learned their lesson. #5. One of our good friends holds the first bioengeering patent. His partner ended up buying the patent from the company he worked for when it closed. He found a major corporation violated it. He tried to enforce the patent. His laywer told him it was a hopeless case: they were too big and he was too small. But, since it was worth multi-millions he pressed on. That was a _big_ mistake. They countersued with scores of false infringement claims. Each one took hours of paperwork to counter, as well as legal fees. After he lost 300k, he was asked "willing to give up? " He had to, he was out of money. So, even the minimal government involvement is gamed by those with power. In a pure free market system, we have less freedom for the average individual. Instead, we have the golden rule of Texas applied: "He who hath the gold makes the rules." I learned to fly under the radar. As I mentioned, techniques I patented while working for companies are used industry wide. After I became independant, I came up with an idea that would be worth tens of millions to a company that used it. But, I knew better than to try to patent it. If I did, I would be likely to lose my life savings. That's the real world of the market. BTW, I did read "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress." It's great fiction. Dan M. -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web LIVE – Free email based on Microsoft® Exchange technology - http://link.mail2web.com/LIVE _______________________________________________ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
