Comment Re:"use it or lose it" is not a good idea. (Score 1) 528
If prospect of a reward is all that motivates people to work on problems such as the one you describe, why would a 17-year time period (or a 50-year period, for that matter) motivate them any more than a one-year period? Oligopolies only tend to consolidate further over time, so what would be the practical benefit of the longer time frame? In the end the existing refiners would still wind up benefiting from the idea without having to pay anyone.
My point is that, no matter what motivates technological innovation, making an innovation freely available to ALL competitors in an industry (whether few or many) stands the best chance of bringing its benefits to the broadest group of people (even if those benefits have to trickle down to consumers through oligopolistic competitors). Under the current system, the ability to lock up patents for a substantial period -- whether you intend to use them or not -- is just one more factor that big players can use to keep competitors out of their arena.
It sounds as though your real quarrel is with the decline of competition within an industry as capital consolidates in fewer and fewer firms. THAT, and not the duration of patent rights, is what negates the value of a patent held by someone outside of those few firms, isn't it? And if it is, then the period of the patent protection is irrelevant.
My point is that, no matter what motivates technological innovation, making an innovation freely available to ALL competitors in an industry (whether few or many) stands the best chance of bringing its benefits to the broadest group of people (even if those benefits have to trickle down to consumers through oligopolistic competitors). Under the current system, the ability to lock up patents for a substantial period -- whether you intend to use them or not -- is just one more factor that big players can use to keep competitors out of their arena.
It sounds as though your real quarrel is with the decline of competition within an industry as capital consolidates in fewer and fewer firms. THAT, and not the duration of patent rights, is what negates the value of a patent held by someone outside of those few firms, isn't it? And if it is, then the period of the patent protection is irrelevant.
