Your entire argument hinges on the notion that ideas are property, which is obviously false.
On Apr 9, 2:31 pm, Marcin Szkudlarek <[email protected]> wrote: > Capitalism is about respect for individual's property. People have > right to own things. If you deny this principle then you're going into > direction of communism/socialism and I believe that's what Joe meant. > So saying that patent law is communistic is an absolute nonsense. It > protects individual's property, the same way as the law which says > that stealing is illegal. The question you should answer is whether > you consider an invention as a property? If yes then some kind of > regulation is required. I don't know the details of US patent law but > the current regulation seems to be a compromise which protects > individual's property and keeps the market moving because patent is > temporary. > > On Apr 9, 10:54 am, Reinier Zwitserloot <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Second point: Is joe's 'bashing' deserved? > > > He threw the word 'communist' out there. It was a great discussion... > > and he deserves what he's getting. If he was a delicate wallflower I > > would gladly admonish the forum to hush, but the tone is relatively > > civil and Joe doesn't strike me as the kind of guy that'll wither away > > from a few forum comments. > > > NB: Good lord, Joe, you're so wrong, it's staggering. The patent law > > system, *THATS* communistic. It gives people monopolies, it uses laws > > and government interference to interrupt the market. It only vibes > > even a little bit with the entire notion of a capitalist western > > system if you consider ideas property, but that obviously doesn't > > work, as that amounts to thought crime. To put it a different way: > > > Guy A thinks of some barely novel idea, let's say one-click shopping, > > and patents it. He's got a ton of dough to bankroll the lawyers and > > sets up shop, but he's a patent troll and/or an operator of an obscure > > website so its not all that well known. > > > 3 years later, Guy B comes up with the same idea, entirely separate > > from Guy A. He's not rich enough to front the multiple 10,000s of > > dollars it takes for a thorough patent review*, so he just builds his > > site. After 6 months and plenty of business, Guy A sues him for patent > > infringement. He wins (what with the lawyers he's got) and manages to > > hold Guy B accountable for lost profits, which bankrupt Guy B. > > > How is this not: > > > (A) thought crime, > > (B) retarded, > > (C) entirely possible with the current patent law, and > > (D) Something that sniffs of Stalinese practices far more than what's > > colloquially known as 'the free market'? > > > *) It costs that much because everything is patentable, even > > completely obvious stuff that definitely isn't a mechanism, due to the > > frivolous abuse of patent law, and the USPTO's position that they > > grant just about every patent provided its written with the magic > > words included ("A system and method"), and will then strike them back > > down again when someone challenges them in court with prior art. It > > costs a ton of money to search for prior art, and it's virtually > > impossible to strike down a patent on the basis that it isn't novel or > > isn't a mechanism. If it can be done at all you need an ace lawyer. > > The end result is that reviewing for possible infringements in a > > product costs more than $10,000 and challenging any resulting found > > patents, even completely ridiculous ones, will easily run you over > > $50,000. This is stifling in the extreme, and a freelancer like > > yourself isn't served very well by such a system. > > > On Apr 8, 6:12 pm, Scott Melton <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > In a free and open society it is easy to find fault in complicated > > > systems, just as it is easy to have a bias, pick sides and misrepresent > > > the facts. One example in this thread, I may be wrong, but I think there > > > is good reason for simplifying the patent granting process from who > > > invented it first(which can be very difficult and costly to prove) to who > > > filed first. Is the change a choice between the lesser of two weavels? > > > Certainly. Infinitely more knowledgeable people than I made the decision. > > > I will side with them until I become a patent lawyer or become so well > > > informed that I can pass judgment on this complicated system. > > > > On to the Joe bashing or un-bashing if you will. Everyone has a bias. If > > > you think you do not then you are biased toward the delusional. I enjoy > > > the spirited discussions on the Java Posse podcast and think it is > > > crucial to have them. If a bias surfaces from time to, (Apple, UNIX!, > > > Windows) that is fine with me. I am lucky to know where they sit, before > > > they tell me where they stand. > > > > The Posse members take extreme measures to inform people about where they > > > sit. They do an exemplary job of presenting the issues in a well thought > > > out, open, balanced and professional manner. Knowing their bias(or > > > assuming I do) sometimes helps me understand their position more clearly. > > > > Having listened to over half of the podcasts, I have come to the > > > conclusion that the format is an easy, open and professional one. It is > > > easy to listen to, very informative and sometimes as fun as a barrel of > > > monkeys. (That is a whole lot of fun!) For someone to personally > > > criticize and insult a member for having a bias and not conforming to > > > their way of thinking(right or wrong) is non-productive and > > > unnecessary(unwanted?) in this format. > > > > That is my opinion. Take it or leave it. There is no reason to personally > > > criticize or insult me for it. > > > > Apologies for high jacking this thread, > > > Scott Melton > > > > Opinion sent from my ASS phone. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
