5 ms·
1) Patents shouldn't be transferable -- this eliminates patent trolls 6) If you don't use the patent in a business use-case, you lose it. A bit like Trademark.
by dhume 15y ago
1) Patents shouldn't be transferable -- this eliminates patent trolls
6) If you don't use the patent in a business use-case, you lose it. A bit like Trademark.
Suppose somebody invents a device but lacks the facilities to mass-produce them (building by hand is probably too expensive to make for a viable product). Rule (1) bars the inventor from selling the patent to somebody who has these facilities, so it appears necessary to arrange a licensing deal with a manufacturer (I expect selling a license to manufacture is still allowed and would count as a business use of the patent). How long does the inventor have to make such a deal before those who do have the right production facilities can simply ignore the patent and produce/sell the invention without compensating the inventor?
- bane 15y agoExcellent questions. I have no idea, just positing some ideas for reform that differ from the impracticable (and not going to happen) abolition. Licensing of a patent by the original assignee for specific use of for immediate manufacture makes sense to me.
- coffeeaddicted 15y agoThat's correct for patents in general - but I don't really think it's valid for software. Software is a lot more like book writing than like manufacturing. You can generally just do it once you manage to finance yourself for a while. Once you have really thought through all the details you are usually finished with the work.