I hadn't considered that potential.
Part of the argument from the
pro-patent perspective is that patents are granted to stimulate the arts in
order to provide incentive for the inventor to invest in their invention in the
first place.
Yet you make a very valid point that the reality is likely
the opposite:
the inventor spends the time and money
then
the
investor comes along when the inventor is collapsing and purchases it at a
song
Everyone else is taking the risks and the predatory investor is coming
along when the risk-takers are up against the ropes and paying - quite likely -
pennies on the dollar.
Now there's a potential way to fix the patent
system. Have a requirement that:
If the original inventor wants to sell the
invention - the inventor must keep a detailed record of all the costs associated
with the invention. Anyone that wants to buy must pay at least that much for
the patent.
If the original inventor can not find such a buyer, the
inventor must retain the patent or release it to the public domain.
To
transfer a patent otherwise automatically invalidates the patent - thereby
pushing the invention into the public domain.
That would make it illegal to
build a business on simply acquiring patents strictly for licensing
purposes.
RAS[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|