Tuesday, April 01, 2014
Counterintuitive but sensible
Some of the commenters on this ArsTechnica piece about a patent-troll court case are advocating a surprisingly sensible principle.
Leave aside previous thinking about patents. Start fresh from the notion that Patents Encourage And Protect Large Investments.
An idea that doesn't require a large investment doesn't need the heavy artillery of lawsuits, and doesn't deserve to be bullied by trolls who make large investments in trolling. In the realm of small investment, just let companies compete. Small investments usually imply local or regional sales. At this level most customers choose products or services by features or appearance or store loyalty. Products are rarely unique enough to be worth a patent fight.
If an idea requires significant investment (as in multi-millions to billions), it's worth the trouble for government to guarantee a short-term monopoly. A company that can afford large development costs can also afford the lawyers to use the patent, and deserves to know that its development costs won't be canceled out by a cheap copy.
Seems sort of anti-democratic on the surface, but actually levels the playing field for smaller operators.
What would this mean in practice? Patents should be very costly and very strictly checked, and should be issued quickly to companies that can afford them.
¶ 5:08 AM 
