Frequently Asked Questions
Mon-Fri, 9am to 12pm and
1pm to 5pm U.S. Mountain Time:
Chat With Us
April 4, 2012
News - Testifying in Front of th…
about 2 years ago
I guess I wasn’t clear on my point about the little guy. Andy4us is right about the system as a whole being broken. It is broken in so many ways that as you correctly point out it is beyond the resources, in terms of financial, time, and labor, for “the little guy” to even think about a patent. That’s what I meant by “cheaper”
Also, you are absolutely right about “illigitimate” patents. I recently heard that Microsoft held patents for various things like text boxes and check boxes, etc, and now several cell phone OEMs that use Andriod OS must pay them royalties that just blew my mind. One of our competitors has a patent on taking several off the shelf products and putting them together in a particular configuration, again blows my mind. I always thought patents were for actual inventions?
Obviously there is no simple solution and unfortunately I sincerely doubt congress is going to change a thing.
They wont abuse it because a tax break simply would not work, it’s crazy talk. Policing is certainly an issue but also the break itself would have to be incredibly large to make it worth it. And for the little guy, forget it. A patent is his only protection (if he can afford one).
If Apple invented some new gotta-have-it device with new technologies and a hat, how much do you suppose they would have to get in tax breaks to make it worth them releasing the technologies to the public where their competitors (particular the foreign ones) would swoop in and make it better and cheaper (or at least cheaper) thus killing a large chunk of Apples market for the thing? Not to mention the value of having Apple pay for all the R&D to develop the technology while others sit back and reap the rewards.
In reality, while I love open source and think it helps bring out the creativity in a whole lot of people that might otherwise never have that chance, pretty much anything “earth moving” requires the type of research and equipment which those evil profits provide. Now I am not saying companies do it right either, most are slow moving and often can’t see their nose in front of their face but they do have the resources to throw at something once they do decide to do it.
I agree the time frames are way too long and should be cut back to no more than 5 years for a patent. They should also be considerably cheaper to get, something within the reach of an average Joe. This would promote the goal of getting things out into the public domain and encourage even the backyard inventor to contribute.
No public wish lists :(
Forgot your password?
No account? Register one!