Users who Dugg This
adam jones
12160 Followers
Sabrina Holland
816 Followers
jailbroken
151 Followers
blindbirds
297 Followers
jordanisjAug 3, 2010
Since when does anyone in China recognize patents??
wonderchemistAug 4, 2010
Every once in a while China will round up a selected group of patent infringers and send them off to get a free reeducation, and the US will say 'Hey, thanks! That will help my reelection campaign! Let's do it all again in 4 years.'
diggzaurusAug 4, 2010
yeah... reminds me of "we need a hanging" from 'Gangs Of New York'... doesn't matter if they are guilty or not...
jezsikAug 4, 2010
Actually, they do recognize patents ... when a foreign firm infringes on a Chinese company's patent.
engineerabizAug 6, 2010
That's because China patented the intellectual property-right infringement process. So according to international law, they are the only ones who are allowed to get away with it.
gosuhaxerAug 4, 2010
®™
clemsontigerAug 4, 2010
The thing about the patent is that you must provide enough incentive to research and develop new products/ideas but yet make it short enough that you don't stifle competition. It's a very fine line.
factsahoyAug 4, 2010
That line isn't the problem in the U.S. Our pathetically broken patent office is awarding bulls**t patents in droves, on things that are expressly non-patentable. Software, for example. Algorithms are not patentable, so WTF are these software patents? Yes, they're bulls**t.
Then we have "business method" patents. What should be a joke is in fact used to stifle not only innovation, but basic commerce. Amazon patenting clicking on something to select it? What would have happened if someone had patented pointing at stuff under the deli counter?
Patent reform should be at the top of Obama's agenda, but so far we've seen jack s**t for progress.
engineerabizAug 6, 2010
Agree on most of your points. The only thing is that software is not just an algorithm. It is an algorithm that has been repackaged into a digital product. It is tangible development that is used to be used by people who could never figure out how to process such a complex series of calculations if their lives depended on it (never mind how it speeds up these calculations).
But yeah, we need to deal with patent reforms so I can stop hearing about patents for the newest "leg warmer for sheep that have been cleaved" or equally retarded s**t.
factsahoyAug 7, 2010
"It is an algorithm that has been repackaged into a digital product."
If you mean a physical product, then the patent should only apply to that one product. Even then, the patent shouldn't hinge on the use of the algorithm.
If you mean it's expressed in a digital form, then I disagree on its patentability. That's like saying you can patent the description of an algorithm in Spanish. Then in French. Then in Chinese. The language in which the algorithm is expressed shouldn't be patentable, and "digital" is just another language.
If you want to see proof of the USPTO's brokenness, look up "patent on a method of swinging", granted to (if I remember correctly) an eight-year-old.
runnamuck62Aug 4, 2010
I understand that it may limit the grow of the market due to the inability build on to another person's work, but if there were no patents, then anytime a starting entrepreneur make a new product, big companies would immediately copy it and sell it for less, bankrupting the original inventor.
llanowarAug 4, 2010
Patents are a good thing. The way they are abused by said big companies isn't.
The huge companies just file loads and loads of patents on very basic ideas, without actually bothering to invent it.
Then when some starting entrepreneur comes up with the idea and invents it he is f**ked as there is already a patent for it. So all his hard work will go to the company that just wrote something on paper and declared it theirs.
factorof13Aug 4, 2010
It also works the other way too. People patent ideas that they have no means to produce and sell the patents to the bigger companies who can produce. This is how a lot of small time inventors make a living.
eddiepotatoAug 4, 2010
Seems like there should be some provision which forces the filing entity to actively develop on a patent within a certain amount of time, else it automatically becomes un-patentable public domain. Somewhere in the ballpark of 3-5 years.
Of course, there would still be room for abuse, with companies "pretending" to act on a patent just to hold onto it, but it would be better than nothing.
iamacyborgAug 4, 2010
"anytime a starting entrepreneur made a new product, big companies would immediately copy it and sell it for less, bankrupting the original inventor."
How many starting entrepreneurs do you know who became successful by virtue of patenting their work? I'm guessing it's much smaller than the number that get f**ked over by patent law. (ex: They invent something and then a company claims some obvious feature uses a patent they registered.)
Example:
http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2007/05/28/100033867/
I think we would be much better off with no patents as they exist currently (i.e. a government monopolized judicial system and law enforcement system administers all patents through threat of physical repercussions). Yes, it would completely change the way products are developed and researched, but I believe it would be on the net a positive as the market adapted to the new freedoms.
paduraAug 4, 2010Submitter
yup
halphpriceAug 4, 2010
BIG BUSINESS ALREADY RIP OFF LITTLE GUYS, PATENTS AND COPYRIGHTS ARE MADE TO HELP THEM MAKE A PROFIT. SMALL GUYS DON'T HAVE LAWYERS TO SUE LIKE CORPORATIONS DO. oops caps on, well it looks like i'm serious. but it's the truth.
lcllamAug 4, 2010
If an invention is truly non-obvious, even large corporations will take time to copy the idea. If an idea creates value, it will sell itself in a very short time, making the inventor money. 'Single click purchasing', 'Object oriented graphics engine' and 'method to exercise cat using laser pointer' are all rubbish.
Problem is, it seems everyone is patenting a mashup of existing technologies and methods, and claiming it as 'novel' and 'innovative'. These stifle innovation. They get through only because the examination process is f**ked. Lawyers shouldn't examine things outside of law.
Innovation doesn't need protection. I believe 'true' innovation protects and rewards itself. There's no need for a patent system. It just protects rubbish to the detriment of innovation and a free market.
Natural selection, much?
mouskyAug 4, 2010
If something can be quickly copied and brought to the market, then perhaps the original 'invention' shouldn't have been awarded a patent.
Not every invention should be worthy of a patent. In fact, since it is a government-granted monopoly, it should be very difficult to obtain a patent.
iwashere2Aug 4, 2010
It's time i registerd some patents...... BBL
morpheousmartyAug 4, 2010
And look where it has got them, with their rapidly declining standards of living and stifled innovation. If only they would copy the US's legally responsible way of privatizing ideas they could grow their middle class.
/s
eddiepotatoAug 4, 2010
For what it's worth, the division between rich and poor has been growing faster in China than in the US.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Gini_since_WWII.svg
morpheousmartyAug 4, 2010
The poor can't be getting any poorer in China so people are just getting richer. Let's see, here it is:
http://blogs.marke****ch.com/cody/2010/08/02/five-plays-on-the-china-middle-class-explosion/
So yeah, upward mobility in China is doing great.
cosworth99Aug 4, 2010
So Canada is patent free?
When will people learn to use North America instead of "US"
factorof13Aug 4, 2010
We think of you guys as Europe. Just go with it.
dikkyAug 4, 2010
canadas opinion on anything and the way we operate doesnt matter and i say this as a canadian
maybe if we did have such a small population, silly name and flag it would be different
Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
lemadAug 4, 2010
Canada is unimportant.
(btw I'm Canadian myself)
Closed AccountAug 4, 2010
Anybody could miss Canada, all tucked away down there.
inactiveuserAug 4, 2010
Canada?
jhsimpson0Aug 4, 2010
Australia, New Zealand, South Korea and Japan too.
diggrageAug 4, 2010
When will people include Mexico when complaining that Canada is part of North America.
Closed AccountAug 4, 2010
because Mexico is part of North America..... Mexico is like the weird kid that you are friends with but dont want anyone to know
drgmdpAug 4, 2010
no, there are just three
Closed AccountAug 4, 2010
@drgmdp.... are you kidding me? you think there are only 3 countries in North America?!?!?!
Antigua and Barbuda
The Bahamas
Barbados
Belize
Canada
Costa Rica
Cuba
Dominica
Dominican Republic
El Salvador
Greenland (Kalaallit Nunaat)
Grenada
Guatemala
Haiti
Honduras
Jamaica
Mexico
Nicaragua
Panama
Saint Kitts and Nevis
Saint Lucia
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
Trinidad and Tobago
United States of America
next time pay attention in school... if you went to one
drgmdpAug 5, 2010
all of those countries except for mexico, canada and the US are in central america and the antilles, moron
halphpriceAug 4, 2010
Mostly Harmless.
erkokiteAug 4, 2010
Are Japan and South Korea patent free?
ugen64Aug 4, 2010
south korea is not. my dad works for the USPTO and he works with the korean patent office a lot...
mark5hsAug 4, 2010
But pretty much everywhere civilized has patent law, by that description.
iamacyborgAug 4, 2010
"Apple has so far received 3287 U.S.-issued patents and has 1767 applications pending: a total of 5054"
I remember as a kid I wanted to grow up to be an inventor. I'm glad I didn't. Can you imagine trying to be creative while navigating a minefield of thousands of active patents to ensure you don't inadvertently add some obvious feature that some mega corp has patented for their own monopolized use?
If you invent something incredible that changes lives and become a millionaire, there's a high probability that some crackpot patented something sufficiently similar that they can rape you for all kinds of legal costs even if they can't secure a payout.
eddiepotatoAug 4, 2010
I patented an angry post very similar to this one in 2007. My legal department will be contacting your legal department shortly.
taxmanAug 4, 2010
Companies usually patent to make sure that they can use it in future and that competition doesn't use it. The old days of inventors are dead.There is no idea an inventor can come up from his garage, make a patent and get paid millions anymore. You need research for years and have resources that can only be provided by a company and as such when you work for a company, your patent belongs to them.
Yes, it is annoying when your idea is already done before (happens to me a lot) but when my patents are nothing more than props to my resume, the pain isn't really that high.
xptoastAug 4, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
mbraynardAug 4, 2010
Stop whining.
I have applied for a patent have associates who work in the USTPO.
It's not that hard or expensive. If you can put together a worthwhile idea, you can get a patent. Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
iamacyborgAug 4, 2010
Good for you. My complaint was not about the difficulty of obtaining a new patent.
That said, I think you're exaggerating the ease of obtaining a patent. Here is a description of the process from a Registered Patent Agent:
http://www.professorpatents.com/time.htm
"So typically, from the time a client engages me, it takes a couple of years before a patent is actually issued."
That sounds pretty s**tty to me.
mbraynardAug 4, 2010
Have you ever heard of 'patent pending?'
And not all patents take so long, either.
iamacyborgAug 4, 2010
Only 54% of pending patents are approved, so there is significant risk to making investments which are based on a pending patent.
http://www.inventionstatistics.com/Number_of_New_Patents_Issued.html
I never said they did. I quoted a Registered Patent Agent who stated the typical time was 2 years. This implies that some are shorter and some are longer.
chimeraheroAug 4, 2010
I first read the title as "Parent Free Zone," and thought to rejoice.
nullcodesAug 4, 2010
Patent free zones = undeveloped countries with no manufacturing base anyway.
captainchrisAug 4, 2010
http://levine.sscnet.ucla.edu/general/intellectual/againstfinal.htm
check out the free book 'against intellectual monopoly'. it explains how much of a burden patents are; all to benefit the few who have them.
k1k1r1k1Aug 4, 2010
I don't think you understand how much of a burden R&D is on a company... unless you mean how much of a burden the current specific patent process is.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
mouskyAug 4, 2010
If something takes billions of dollars to 'invent', it is not going to be that easily copied. Even then, copying the original is no guarantee that you will make lots of money.
And even if there are copies, the original inventor can still make money from their 'invention'. Johnson & Johnson, through McNeil Consumer Healthcare, continues to manufacturer Tylenol despite the availability of generic brands. Same thing for Bayer and Aspirin.
ravagedsoulAug 4, 2010
There was a time when it cost you thousands of hours of real work to develop something you could patent, and to do so you had to have a ... thing. Now, you can just have a vague thought and pay a patent attorney (though all the revisions and appeals) and you get a patent.
Further, the *market* now is orders of magnitude larger than it was a hundred years ago.
Try to find the cases where a "little guy" has benefited from the patent system. My personal posterchild is "sawstop" - a genuinely original idea, taken to a real product - and the guy who did is has to fight tooth and nail to hold on to the rights.
Closed AccountAug 4, 2010
Yes, because look at the wonderful quality of life in these countries! This just proves that the patent system should be scrapped! /s
travelsonicAug 4, 2010
....what?
myztryAug 4, 2010
Research and development would continue without patents. Companies wouldn't just close shop because a certain market had become saturated and they couldn't gain a patent monopoly on another. The shark needs to keep moving forward or it dies.
iamacyborgAug 4, 2010
Completely agree. Most innovation does not occur in the form of completely unprecedented new ideas. Innovation is a process of continuous, incremental improvement. Eli Whitney did not invent the cotton gin, he merely slightly improved upon the existing design and then PATENTED it, meaning nobody else could incrementally improve upon his design.
The Wright brothers were similar - there was a race to get the patent and it was only a matter of time until someone developed a working plane. The Wright brother's patent absolutely crippled airplane innovation in America until the government finally violated their own controls by taking over the patent.
Can you imagine how much better products we would have as consumers if companies and individual entrepreneurs could rip each other's ideas off wholesale, improve on them, and release? It would be an all and out war to provide the highest value to consumers in order to secure some kind of revenue stream. Look how rapidly the Android platform is developing (which is, I believe, free or nearly so to use and modify), and imagine if all innovation occurred at this pace.
xptoastAug 4, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
g99xAug 4, 2010
To be fair, a lot of these countries also ignore all intellectual property. Speaking as someone in the games industry, we know that Brazil is a total crap country to sell products in because of the rampant piracy. It serves as a very good counterpoint to the "piracy should be legal" crap that gets thrown around by people like Mike Masnick (the author of the linked article). If everyone behaved like Brazil we'd be out of business, and gamers would be forced to play games that look like they were built in the 1990s.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
niubaiAug 4, 2010
There are one million of reasons for the high levels of piracy in Brazil, especially in the games sector. The most important of all, of course, is the price. Games are too damn expensive for the Brazilian reality because most of them are not made here, they're imported and the government tax the hell out of it.
Starcraft 2 is selling like water in the desert here (check at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTTm9y-wsYg , looks like US or Europe, right ?) because they managed to put in an attractive price, same thing for Steam games.
Compare, for example, Red Dead Redemption for the XBOX360:
Gamestop: $59.99 http://www.gamestop.com/Catalog/ProductDetails.aspx?product_id=74710
Brazil: R$199,90 http://www.americanas.com.br/AcomProd/1858/3110709 (that's almost $100.00)
Thing is: if the game price is reasonable, people will buy it, there's a huge market for games in Brazil.
travelsonicAug 4, 2010
Piracy is "rampant" here, China, etc, and the video game industries haven't died nor have the music or movie industries that tried the "piracy = death of creative media" crap. It wasn't true 20 years ago or 10 years ago, and it isn't true today - piracy will impact these companies, but to say it will be the death of them, or creative media, is bulls**t. People will create, people will find a way to monetize their creativity.
4ndr01dAug 4, 2010
light bulb
phonograph
telephone
radio
television
airplanes
computer
telegraph
sewing machine
artificial heart
bifocals
cotton gin
refridgerator
coffee pot
revolver
safety pin
oil well,
water tower
repeating rifle
roller skates
typewritter
blue jeans
Coca-cola
Camera
Space Shuttle
Integrated Circuits
Internet (Darpanet)
Jazz
Rock
iPhones
Google
what have you done for me lately rest of the patent free world ?
Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
jezsikAug 4, 2010
Of course nearly every one of those inventions were built from the ideas of others (patented or not). On the other hand, if someone had patented jazz and rock, I seriously doubt it would have progressed as far as it did.
travelsonicAug 4, 2010
"what have you done for me lately rest of the patent free world ? "
Not bothering to respond to strawman arguments like yours?
The video game industry whilst not completely patent free by any stretch of the imagination had a long period of creativity and competition because of the less litigious nature of its operation during the 80s and 90s.
andyswanAug 4, 2010
Looks like a map of the most productive places with the highest standards of living to me...
legoalert33Aug 4, 2010
Anyone willing to make this into a infographic?
Would be interesting to see the comparison of area without patents and maybe even the percentage of world production in each country or something.
irvman21Aug 4, 2010
Who needs patents, just look at all the cancer fighting drugs being developed in Brazil, China, Russia, & India...
travelsonicAug 4, 2010
???
hornyangelAug 5, 2010
I would like to insult you, but my sense of decency forbids it. I'd rather say that you are grossly misinformed.
Many countries develop drugs that are highly effective and cheap that are not sold in the U.S. The FDA won't allow it.
Example in case: Canadian doctors researched and tested this very effective and cheap drug, basically a derivative of vinegar (acetic acid). It is called DCA, and its salts. It is already used in the U.S. to treat childhood acidosis.
However, a physician cannot legally use it as a cancer treatment under the risk of being sued for malpractice and breaking federal law. Do you see my point?
masterchiAug 4, 2010
Why shorten it to "BRIC" if your going to give us exactly what it means, just spell it out to begin with. I hate people always trying to coin their own abbreviation.
fredfredricksonAug 4, 2010
Despite all the examples you see about patent trolling on Digg, most patents are used to protect ideas, and when the system works correctly, all it does is protect people from having their hard work stolen and replicated by people who have a greater means to do so than they.
Without patents, any time anyone had a good idea they couldn't go public with it. If they did, any company with better means of production and distribution could reverse engineer the product, make their own version, and totally steam roll the original creator. Why is that so hard to see?Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
travelsonicAug 4, 2010
"most patents are used to protect ideas,"
Incorrect, patents cover methods, inventions - the bi-products of ideas and not the ideas themselves.
"Despite all the examples you see about patent trolling on Digg, most patents are used to protect ideas..."
Nobody is arguing against the idea that it is overwhelmingly used for good, just that as much good as there is, there is a ton of abuse, and it seems to only be on the rise.
"all it does is protect people from having their hard work stolen ..."
Impossible, since there is no theft involved. Replicated? Within reason, it prevents replication WITHOUT PERMISSION [or royalties], improvements on existing patented inventions, for example, exist very much.
fredfredricksonAug 4, 2010
You would rather mince words than tackle the real issue. A company using an idea that they shouldn't have the rights to might not be "theft" in the traditional sense, but if you were an inventor and you had your idea "stolen", I'm sure you'd feel that that was indeed what had happened.
If you created something new and incredible, there would be nothing stopping anyone from taking your idea and using their greater resources to build, market, and sell it better than you. A patent free world is a world where the little guy gets screwed by the big guy every time.
Only an assh**e would want that.
zonguyAug 4, 2010
I've recently developed a product and have a patent pending. It isn't sold anywhere and I can't find it on the US Patent Search online or the Google patent search. That being said, I'm completely paranoid that someone will somehow claim they already invented it. If this fails because some guy who doesn't even sell these things claims he has patent protection on it, I will be quite upset.
/Cool story bro
But for real... the process is extremely tough for someone without much cash to spend or time to waste, and it makes it very tough to start a business.
itwasonlyajokeAug 4, 2010
China? hahahahahaha
hah
pariramiAug 4, 2010
I'm not surprised... we like free stuff.
People operate with a consciousness tending towards sharing... that's how we've been since cavemen started painting... we've always been a free culture. Patents are a modern anomaly vis-a-vis our evolution as a species... I'm not saying Patents are wrong... I'm just saying we're new to this as a species and thus, it's an aberration of our natural tendencies.
4degreesAug 4, 2010
what with the US enforcing its copyright laws in other countries, i would say no where is safe from patents and the enforcement there of.