翠星石 on Nostr: nprofile1q…5ver3 feld Confusing copyrights, patents and trademark law is ...
nprofile1qy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnddaehgu3wwp6kyqpqet4ne8tc8ndzfvq0y00h645scx8yw0zpxqspkrt6w7juk7s4qz0qk5ver3 (nprofile…ver3) feld (nprofile…xyvy) Confusing copyrights, patents and trademark law is disastrous; https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/not-ipr.html
>It's not used to protect the little guy anyway.
It is correct that book publishers demand that authors hand over their copyright and it's mostly big businesses that applies for a patent and become the patent holder, but that results in monopolies, not protection.
>It gets even more stupid when they use it to ban people from buying seeds and regrowing crops, forcing them to rely on the company for the seeds each harvest.
That's an issue of a massive error in applying patent law, where it was ruled that replanting seeds is patent infringement because a big company said so.
>I mean someone could make the argument that if you created a product, a another company could copy you and sell it, utilizing their brand and capability to produce the same product for less, and push you out the market by just making more of it, so your product doesn't appear on the shelves but do we ever see that happening?
It does happen rarely with a little guy that comes up with a new product and even patents it - a big business takes a look and starts making that product and if the little guy tries to enforce the patent, the big guy goes; "well that's cute, but for that product we have this patent, and this patent and this patent and this one and I'm sure if we go back we'll find more. Why don't we cross license?" and the big guy gets another patent.
Little guys don't have any ability to get their product on store shelf's, although they can sell via direct mail until the point they start get shaken down by patent aggressors.
>There's a great chapter at the beginning about how advancements with the steam engine were held back due to copyright.
If that book has that written, that book if full of many errors, as advancements in the steam engine were held back by patents and one infamous patent of ridiculously long duration.
>It's not used to protect the little guy anyway.
It is correct that book publishers demand that authors hand over their copyright and it's mostly big businesses that applies for a patent and become the patent holder, but that results in monopolies, not protection.
>It gets even more stupid when they use it to ban people from buying seeds and regrowing crops, forcing them to rely on the company for the seeds each harvest.
That's an issue of a massive error in applying patent law, where it was ruled that replanting seeds is patent infringement because a big company said so.
>I mean someone could make the argument that if you created a product, a another company could copy you and sell it, utilizing their brand and capability to produce the same product for less, and push you out the market by just making more of it, so your product doesn't appear on the shelves but do we ever see that happening?
It does happen rarely with a little guy that comes up with a new product and even patents it - a big business takes a look and starts making that product and if the little guy tries to enforce the patent, the big guy goes; "well that's cute, but for that product we have this patent, and this patent and this patent and this one and I'm sure if we go back we'll find more. Why don't we cross license?" and the big guy gets another patent.
Little guys don't have any ability to get their product on store shelf's, although they can sell via direct mail until the point they start get shaken down by patent aggressors.
>There's a great chapter at the beginning about how advancements with the steam engine were held back due to copyright.
If that book has that written, that book if full of many errors, as advancements in the steam engine were held back by patents and one infamous patent of ridiculously long duration.