2011/3/8 Cédric Beust ♔ <[email protected]>: > > > On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 12:58 AM, Kevin Wright <[email protected]> > wrote: >> >> Has everyone seen this >> yet: http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/johanna_blakley_lessons_from_fashion_s_free_culture.html > > Miroslav did a good job showing that the fashion industry is not exactly > innovative, but I'm more interested by your logical claim:
Read to me more like an outsider's view of the industry. Also it ignored that copyright is the missing ingredient. This goes further than patents. In fashion, you can literally copy something you have seen and not worry about lawsuits. >> It's not proof, by any stretch, but it's certainly a very convincing >> demonstration that creativity will happen in spite of patents, and not >> because of them. > > If you assertion were true, all it shows is that indeed, creativity will > happen without patents, but it certainly doesn't show that creativity can't > happen thanks to patents. So, lets explore the one path. If it is possible without patents, what do patents bring to the table? Now you have to show that they bring increased creativity and production. Otherwise, why bother? And, if the assertion is false, where are we? -- 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.
