Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:What should a patent protect? (Score 1) 130

I would suggest, by the way, that an invention that has "rights" has another name - it is a "standard." Those may have other kinds of protection, but standards that aren't open are effectively not standards at all, in my opinion.

It seems to me that the law dances around this distinction. What benefits society and what benefits an individual (inventor or otherwise) or an organization may be very different things since, stating the obvious, individuals, organizations, and societies are different things.

Comment What should a patent protect? (Score 1) 130

Jim, your software patents primer page asserts: "A patent protects an invention."

Is that really the case, in your opinion? (Honest question, not sarcasm, since I was personally defrauded of multiple patents by a former employer.)

It seems to me that protecting inventions is a root of the problem: it shouldn't be an invention that is protected, but a right, of an inventor. Inventions don't have rights, inventors do.

The implication of that, in my view, is that intellectual property rights (in the US) should not be transferable away from individual inventors, and that the protections should not outlive the inventors themselves, since rights are no longer useful to an inventor after death, though an invention likely survives its inventor.

Case in point: Java. James Gosling was ostensibly its inventor. He doesn't own the Java IP - Oracle now does, via his former employer, Sun; Oracle bought Sun to obtain that IP. They've sued Google over that IP. Gosling is now a Google employee, so in effect, he's being sued over something he invented, when his status as inventor would be stipulated by all involved - it's just not a relevant point of law.

I think some other model is needed for funded inventions, maybe something similar to what Sen. Sanders recently proposed, e.g. for inventors who work for companies. I.e., if it is truly an organization that invents and not specific individuals, then some other form of protection should be applicable. And it should have a legal fragility similar to that of trade secrets, since organizations themselves are fragile. Intellectual property should not outlive its inventors, whether those are individuals or organizations, since what is to be protected is inventors' rights, not the invention itself.

Slashdot Top Deals

"If people are good only because they fear punishment, and hope for reward, then we are a sorry lot indeed." -- Albert Einstein

Working...