Want More Jobs? Get Rid Of The Patent Trolls
from the let-innovation-run-free dept
Last fall, after years and years of bickering and fighting, Congress and the President finally got together to pass what they called a "patent reform" bill. While the bill made a few changes to how the patent system works, it almost completely ignored the issue of patent trolling or just how destructive patents are to innovation. Even more ridiculous is that the President insisted that the new bill would create jobs. Perhaps for patent lawyers, but not for many others. Vivek Wadhwa has written up a great piece in the Washington Post noting that if we want job growth, we need to deal with the patent trolls, and most specifically the software patent trolls:The President is mistaken—at least when it comes to the patent system as it relates to software patents. These patents—and the patent system—aren’t creating innovation, they are inhibiting it and, by extension, job creation. Why? Because the breakthroughs aren’t in the patents, they are in the way ideas are commercialized and marketed. Because of flaws in the patent system and government leaders’ misunderstandings, there is an arms race of sorts happening in the tech industry that is sapping billions out of the economy and crushing technology startups. This system is enriching patent trolls—companies that buy patents in order to extort money from innovators. These trolls are like a modern day mafia. Given this, I argue software patents need to be eliminated or curtailed.Indeed. But we'll never fix the patent system if the government continues to think that patents themselves are the key to innovation, despite the evidence showing that patents simply don't correlate to actual innovation.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: congress, jobs, patent reform, vivek wadhwa
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Exactly. So if you abolish patent trolls they won't have jobs and then there would be fewer jobs. No, the solution is to have more patents so that everyone can become a patent troll and the unemployment rate would disappear.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
"Literally, if we took away the minimum wage�if conceivably it was gone�we could potentially virtually wipe out unemployment completely because we would be able to offer jobs at whatever level."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
more patents=more innovation
and so we get todays problem
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
More anti-competitive laws = more campaign contributions
More anti-competitive laws = more revolving door favors
and so this government has turned into a plutocracy that prohibits competition.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
..."(Current president Barack Obama) went on to attend law school, where he became the first African-American president of the Harvard Law Review. Upon graduation"...
According to the subject techdirt.com blurb:
Current president Barack Obama (the guy with the law degree), "insisted that the new bill would create jobs". The blurb went on to opine that it only created jobs for lawyers.
What's so hard to understand? Hire fucking lawyers, get fucking legislation that creates fucking jobs for fucking lawyers.
At least it wasn't G(utless) W(onder) Bush. All the evil donkeys are already fully employed.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
FTFY. It's hard to see how patent lawyers get benefit from less patents.
Btw, who cares for them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
http://www.justice.org/cps/rde/xchg/justice/hs.xsl/2011.htm
"fixing them at this level would be like fixing leaking plumbing with sticky tape."
Bad analogy. Fact is that many problems can be, and are, successfully fixed by a piecemeal approach. Attempts at launching the all encompassing fix addressing all issues is a fools endeavor.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Patents and TechDirt
Anyway, then we get the pro-patent people *always* coming to the immediate defense of patents on *every* article, or at least all I've bothered to look at. Are they monitoring you, making sure they get their 'side of the story' out, or is this a means to drive debates?
Here's the crux of patents: selfishness. It used to be maybe a man wanted to invent something to help mankind, and would give that invention away - and he'd surely have a job, or good income from his invention, if nothing other than his increased stature and reputation.
Now, its all about money, just like everything. Of course, this is nothing new. Our entire civilization throughout the last few thousand years has struggled with greed vs giving oneself to the world.
While it is easy to blame the world, and say that's the way things are, so I gotta play by those rules .. and it is easy to blame other people .. as they act immorally, so I have to in order to stay afloat.. its just not true.
The rebellion can start with you. The true shame is that our selfish society has done something truly evil ... Now having the capacity to feed, clothe, and give basic health care to every human on the planet, we DO NOT. Why? There's no money in it. The limited programs out there do the best they can, but they don't cover everyone. Why help those 'freeloaders'? Because they aren't all freeloaders for one, and secondly, providing for their basic human needs should be something anyone with a heart would do for anyone, regardless of how you feel about them. Also, nobody *wants* to live in poverty, on the charity of others.. they aren't living the 'good life' on welfare. Why do I say this is evil? Because of the disparity we see on the opposite side of the spectrum. Those who have more money than they would or could ever need, while others starve. Yet while they call the poor feeling entitled, it is them who feel entitled to living a superior life to the 'poor', which they assume are poor for reasons that are their own fault.
Call me crazy, I know some of you will ;)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Patents and TechDirt
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Expire
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
think about the children
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: think about the children
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Want More Jobs...
Both patents and copyright create artificial monopolies and stifle any improvements. The sooner we are rid of them, the better off we'll all be.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Rubes
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Rubes
If any body of law has become so perverse from its constitutional mandate that do longer works as it was intended and has been degenerated into a mere "game"--a legal slot machine in the case of patents--then, yes, it should be scraped.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Rubes
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Want More Jobs...?
The use of force or fraud to take from others without voluntary consent is wrong no matter if it's done by one person acting alone or if it's done by so called "officials" in fine hats.
Wants more jobs....FREEDOM is the ANSWER. [see The Philosophy of Liberty]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Want More Jobs...?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Afraid to compete
Some guy gets put in a spot where he has to learn everything about the new technology that is running the plant. Over the years, he becomes proficient at what he does. Eventually, the "new" technology becomes obsolete, and a new project is proposed. Many times, the "expert" doesn't like the new "new" technology, becaue he is afraid that he won't be able to deliver again. After all, he's older, he's secure in his position, he doesn't see the point in all this "wasted" effort to start up some unproven new "new" technology.
So he becomes the dog in the manger, stuck where he is because he doesn't have confidence in his ability to hit a home run again. He refuses to share information or effort. Everybody loses.
So management is stuck with a dilemna. Although the "expert" is the best at what he does, it is obvious that he isn't going to be doing his best at the new "new" project. But anyone else is unproven. He has management backed against the wall. Do they take less than the best from their "expert" or do they gamble on a new guy? I can tell you from personal experience that none of the options are anything but painful.
The current situation is that the people with the past success don't have just the experience, they also have the money, and the ear of the legislators who can pass protective laws to keep any upstarts from threatening their secure positions. Things will get REALLY bad before they start to get better.
Open up the bullpen and let the young kids out to play. There will be chaos for a while, but we'll all win in the end. I do believe that the US can compete on the world market. We just might have to give up some toys to join in, but we can do it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
AIA
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
IP
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
IP
[ link to this | view in chronology ]