Move this to politics at brlug.net, thanks.

---
Puryear Information Technology, LLC
Baton Rouge, LA * 225-706-8414
http://www.puryear-it.com

Author of "Best Practices for Managing Linux and UNIX Servers"
Download your free copy:
http://www.puryear-it.com/bestpractices.htm

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Eric G Ortego 
  To: General at brlug.net 
  Sent: Monday, October 17, 2005 5:34 AM
  Subject: Re: [brlug-general] to release or not to release,intellectual 
retentiveness.





  On 10/14/05, Doug Riddle <doug_riddle at yahoo.com> wrote:
    Consider Universities when discussing patents,
    licenses, and copyrights, and plant variety
    protections (PVP)from an Intellectual Property point
    of view.

  The article I linked to touched on the Uni perspective. In it they voice 
their concerns on the growing difficulty in their ability to obtain permission 
to do research with genes covered by patents. 



    We want this fungicide out for our
    farmers and gardeners in the state to have for their 
    needs.  In fact, our charter requires us to get this
    chemical out to our citizens, but we don't have the
    money or facilities to make it.  We need the free
    market economy for that.

    So how do we accomplish this goal? 

  IMHO this is what the State and Federal Governments "should" be used for. But 
they seem more focused on regulating controls and servicing corporations.


    As a University, and a 501C, we can help them
    get grants and low interest loans by partnering with 
    them so we can get the stuff on the market.

    The patent and subsequent license provides the small
    company the incentive to make the product.  

  I don't think that patents should be incentives. Fake value, greedy 
reasoning, and controls everyone else's ability to build upon common knowledge. 
Especially with un-common knowledge like research the ability to grow upon 
ideas and techniques shouldn't be hampered by unnecessary controls. What 
happens when our children want to use our works to further their knowledge? 
They might have to wait for the paperwork to get approved, or worse get denied 
permission.



    As they
    develop the market, the product and market became more
    attractive to the big boys. 


  The big boys are part of the problem. Of course they want to purchase patents 
they are a right to control value.
  I am sure everyone remembers the head Microsoft genious saying,

  "If people had understood how patents would be granted when most of today's 
ideas were invented and had taken out patents, the industry would be at a 
complete standstill today. ...The solution is patenting as much as we can. A 
future startup with no patents of its own will be forced to pay whatever price 
the giants choose to impose. That price might be high. Established companies 
have an interest in excluding future competitors." -Bill Gates(May 16, 1991) 



      A going concern turning a
    profit is much more interesting to a Monsanto or Dow 
    than a chemical formula we hoped someone might want to
    buy to use against a blight only Louisiana has. 

  I hope that researchers are working to solve problems (I do understand the 
need for monetary compensations). The magnitude of the problem will raise or 
lower the demand for the solution or the demand for a solution to be found(i.e. 
funded).


    With
    the license in place the small company's market is
    protected and our farmers get the fungicide.   

  They get to purchase it. Why can't they just make it? Maybe its not possible 
now, maybe it wouldn't even be practical for most in the future, but IMO it 
should be a possibility for those who want it to solve their problem and are 
willing to go through the troubles of learning how. The disservice is done by 
withholding knowledge and giving control of that knowledge's use to a 
corporation who may use it against anyone who trespasses onto their market. 



    In a few
    years, the big boys can get in on it, but most likely
    he will work with us to see them the patent and 
    license his technology before the patent expires and
    move on to the next new product no one wanted to
    produce.

  Or more likely buy the patent from the little guy and lobby to extend the 
length of patent laws thus controlling value and competition.


    Hooray, the good guys win one.  

  If making money is winning, woot. 


    That is a simple case, but that is essentially what a
    patent, license, and/or copyright is intended to do. 

  I think the intent is reasonable I just don't trust the corporations to use 
them as they are intended. 



    By offering exclusive rights for a set period these
    tools encourage developement of new products by 
    protecting the market and allowing the developers and
    producers to enjoy profit from their work.  By giving
    these tools an expiration date, they are designed to
    provide the public access when the protections expire. 
    The patent is particularly valuable because it has to
    provide details that "any reasonable person should be
    able to use to receate the product."

   The disclosure of an innovation required by a patent is very costly to an 
inventor whose innovation is difficult to imitate or reverse engineer. To the 
inventor whose innovation is relatively easy to reverse engineer, the 
protection of patent laws is essential for commercial success. To the inventor 
who wishes to keep his invention a secret there is nothing we can do.



    Now the patent, license, and warranty come into play.
    Was I violating the warranty by using the product 
    incorrectly, or does the patent indicate a flaw that
    the producer should have either corrected or warned me
    of?  Is the producer licensing this technology?  What
    sort of libility does the patent own have it they are 
    other than the producer of the product?

  Warranty, liability, and insurance is a whole other can of worms. Lots of 
which might not be as complicated if we didn't have patents.


    In an ideal world we might not need these things, but
    they sure come in handy when you are trying to get a 
    product to market.

   
  There are several countries without patent laws who's innovations per capita 
are proportional to countries with patent laws.



------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  General mailing list
  General at brlug.net
  http://brlug.net/mailman/listinfo/general_brlug.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
http://brlug.net/pipermail/general_brlug.net/attachments/20051017/df9534cc/attachment.htm

Reply via email to