J Tyran said:
Thats a naive and idealistic way of viewing it, sure I wouldn't disagree that systems are needed to protect the little guy or truly innovative companies but more often than not its actually used against them. Big companies will abuse the system to put them out of business or steal their product,
It protects the big companies, the small companies, the individuals, everyone. It's a deal with society. Society promises to let you have a limited monopoly for a short period of time and in return when it's over, it's all public domain. Innovation has insured incentive. Companies can protect their ideas and investments, individuals can access the research free of charge, and we all get a record of all the neat toys we make. Win-win for everyone. I'm not the largest fan of giant companies, but in this case, individual and company interests are aligned.
J Tyran said:
your windshield wiper guy? Now more likely as not he would have been taken to court and sued for damages because he happened to put a couple of electronic components side by side and a car manufacturer had filed a vague patent about the layout of a PCB after they realised what he had invented and wanted to avoid paying him to use it, the courts would happily oblige them too.
Clearly you didn't look him up, because that's what happened. They even used the much the same arguments. But the courts sided with him because of patent law and awarded him $30 Million in damages.
J Tyran said:
Look at James Dyson and how patents have been a pain in the arse for him since day one, he has had to make sure every single thing in his gadgets is patented. From the design of the motors to the way a wheel axle clips to the body of a vacuum, he has to have several dozen or even hundreds of patents per device because of the early clashes he had with other vacuum manufacturers that tried to squash his company before he became competitive. In the early days the extra expense and effort this cost was crushing and delayed his products getting to market.
Excuse my use of Wikipedia but...
Wikipedia said:
Following his success, other major manufacturers began to market their own cyclonic vacuum cleaners. Dyson sued Hoover UK for patent infringement and won around $5 million in damages.
Yes, the patent process is difficult. No arguing that one. It takes a lot of time to get a patent, and a lot of proof is needed to defend your claim to intellectual property rights because governments don't like granting even limited monopoly status, but without patent law he wouldn't have been able to compete with Hoover at all; much less get $5 million in damages.
