|
Authored by: Gringo_ on Friday, November 16 2012 @ 11:24 AM EST |
Oops - you have confused me. I didn't think I had
formulated some "Premise"
that I now need to "prove". You
must be speaking to somebody else. I have no
desire to
debate the premise "Limiting access to technology promotes
invention." one way or the other, and no thoughts on the
matter to contribute.
I do, however, have some thoughts on
the subject of ear wax, if you would like
to hear them
instead. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, November 16 2012 @ 12:51 PM EST |
Not sure where you get this premise from.
The premise behind patents is
Sharing inventions leads to more inventions.
Letting people make money from inventions leads to more inventions.
A problem in the implementation occurs when a patent is granted for something
when there was no sharing, such as an obvious or trivial idea, or independent or
collaborative implementation.
Another problem is valuation of patents. Do you get paid for the years of study
and false starts that lead upto aha or just for the aha. And another is the
relative value of the patent compared to others. Is one tire on your car worth
more than others, or the motor? If a tire or motor is missing your car won't
run.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonomous on Friday, November 16 2012 @ 01:09 PM EST |
Premise: Limiting access to technology promotes invention.
Example: Suppose
my studies on the effect of temperature on organic metter decomposition lead me
to the theoretical conclusion that I can safely remove inconvenient ear wax.
However it will require several years of development to learn if I can reduce my
method to practice.
Case 1, Patents: A patent will grant me a temporary
monopoly on my invention, during which I may limit access to this new earwax
removal technology by any potential competitors. I may use the time to master
the market or I may charge a fee to allow others to do so. In this case, I
decide the potential reward is worth the risk and effort. I proceed with
development. If I succeed, a new technology comes into existence.
Case 2,
NO Patents: I am NOT allowed to limit access to this new earwax removal
technology; as soon as I reveal my method, anyone can begin to perform it. My
competitors enjoy the advantages of skipping the risk and expense of
development. I reap no reward for my years of effort. In this case, I resolve
not to bother with my invention. Ears everywhere remain clogged and people
continue to attack unproposed premises.
-Wang-Lo.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|