|Authored by: Wol on Saturday, March 16 2013 @ 04:48 AM EDT|
|Something I'm finding a bit annoying here - dunno whether it's trolls or people|
who just don't understand - is those who say "but we shouldn't have
Standards Essential Patents".
Because what they're saying is that if I go to the hard work and effort of
creating a NEW market, they should be allowed to muscle in and nick all my
profits without having to pay me a thing.
I don't necessarily agree with patents, but if you're going to have them then
any *decent* patent worth having has a HIGH chance of becoming an SEP. Think
I come up with a bunch of patents. I don't let you play in my patch. I end up
with a small market, and a small profit (if I'm lucky).
I work hard. I come up with a bunch of real, decent, honest to goodness patents.
I happily licence them out so others can play in my patch. I end up with a big
market, and a sizeable profit. THOSE STANDARDS ARE SEP, PRECISELY BECAUSE I
One only has to look at the difference in the mobile phone market either side of
the pond, to see which one works best :-)
That's why I made a bit of an emphasis on *new* market, because it makes the
justification and FAIRNESS of a properly working patent system much clearer.
What's wrong with you being shut out of a market that didn't exist before I
created it? Nothing! (If you believe in patents, that is.)
And that's what's so wrong here, in that the real inventors have created the
second type of market, and the newcomers are using the "SEP's are
unfair" to try and seize control and turn it into the first kind of
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]