Re: Where would we be without these important patents?


<royls@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:4418e1af.7530316@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 02:44:55 -0000, "Andy F." <never.mind@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

"nospam" <nospam@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:JKWdne-jtsfgYYjZnZ2dnUVZ_v2dnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Andy F. wrote:

That would mean a lot of inventors would be out of a job.

From where you got this idea ? The scientists and engineers are employed
to
design a product. The company will have the full right to use this
designs.

But without exclusive use of the designs, the firm won't make enough
profits
to justify paying the inventors' wages.

Such claims are common, but false and ridiculous. Do you think no
inventor was ever paid wages before there were patents? Give your
head a shake.

Technological progress has been a lot faster since patents were introduced.

It would be more profitable to wait
until someone else invented a new product and then copy them.

No, that is also flat, outright wrong, because then you are behind the
market. Whoever comes out with the product first has a chance to sell
to those who want the product most, and thus sell at a higher price.
Waiting until someone else has a successful product just gets you more
intense competition, customers who do not want the product enough to
buy it right away, and consequently a lower price.

That will be true for some products. There's a short term advantage to being
the first on the market.But that won't always be enough to justify the cost
of developing a new product.

Your claims are flat wrong, as are all the attempts to rationalize
monopoly IP privileges.

However, if during this work a invention,innovation,genial idea pops up
this
is the creation of the inventor and it must be his or her own property.
Assuming exclusive ownership of somebody else creation is just plain
looting.

It's not looting. Patents only become the property of companies because
the
inventors agree to that.

In a sense. Inventors know they have little chance against corporate
legal departments if they invent independently.

You're exaggerating about that.Dyson seems to be doing OK owning his own
patents.
Inventors usually agree to work for a salary because it gives them a regular
income instead of having to wait for uncertain rewards in the future.


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Where would we be without these important patents?
    ... The scientists and engineers are ... But without exclusive use of the designs, ... to justify paying the inventors' wages. ... Technological progress has been a lot faster since patents were ...
    (sci.econ)
  • Re: Where would we be without these important patents?
    ... But without exclusive use of the designs, the firm won't make enough profits ... to justify paying the inventors' wages. ... is the creation of the inventor and it must be his or her own property. ... It's not looting. ...
    (sci.econ)
  • Re: Where would we be without these important patents?
    ... But without exclusive use of the designs, the firm won't make enough profits ... to justify paying the inventors' wages.It would be more profitable to wait ... is the creation of the inventor and it must be his or her own property. ... It's not looting. ...
    (sci.econ)
  • Re: Where would we be without these important patents?
    ... The scientists and engineers are ... But without exclusive use of the designs, ... to justify paying the inventors' wages. ... Technological progress has been a lot faster since patents were ...
    (sci.econ)
  • Re: Where would we be without these important patents?
    ... But without exclusive use of the designs, ... to justify paying the inventors' wages. ... Technological progress has been a lot faster since patents were introduced. ...
    (sci.econ)