On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 12:13 AM, Scott Melton <scott_rides_ag...@yahoo.com>wrote:
> No worries. That's just a flippant saying to reflect that the free market > model is riddled with problems and yet it is the best model out there, IMHO. > > Free beer is good, but yes, the freedom for me as an individual to spend my > time the way I see fit or lack of freedom to take advantage of someone's > work without compensating him for it. Maybe our understanding of a (general) > free market model is different? > > I would agree with your examples, in general, even though specifically I'd > dispute most of them. The cave man who "invented" fire had a patent and was > better off than his fireless buddies for a time. His patent was if someone > tried to steal his property he would kill them. He had a monopoly punishable > by death. I bet he got all the hot cave women... > You have evidence it was a sole individual who harnessed fire? > > In the absolute, I would agree that patents are not absolutely necessary > for innovation. Some people would do it just for the sake of doing it. Most > would not. > Is this fact or belief? > > Would you agree that patents and property rights greatly accelerate the > rate of innovations, accelerating the growth of a free market economy? > No, I wouldn't, I have yet to see proof of this, on the contrary I see a lot of innovation in the Open Source Community, and the Apache V2 license, that gives you permission to make money off of my work without compensating me for it, seems to be heavily used. > > Why would I would I work nights and weekends to come up with a solution to > a real world problem if I knew that as soon as I did I received nothing for > it? Because you have your reasons? You actually enjoy solving problems? You want to help people? > The answer is I would not. I would do something where I would get rewarded > instead. So getting a kick out of solving a hard problem, or helping other people isn't rewarding enough for you, but I promise you, there are a lot of people out there who have their reasons to innovate without demanding monopolies. > Camp, fish, raise kids, work a few extra hours for that new toy money, you > get the picture. > Interestingly only the working extra part actually gave you a monetary reward, perhaps you see that there can be a personal value in "charity" work, or plain old hobbyism. > > Why would a pharmaceutical company spend millions on researching a new > cancer drug if they knew they were just throwing money out the window? I don't know about you, but atleast in the country I live, a big chunk of the money that goes into pharmaceutical research is supplied by the government, so basically taxes are used to finance it. And I think we can agree on that the government has a lot to gain by lowering costs for cancer treatment and loss of taxes because people are ill and cannot work. If they had to turn over the results to the market where their competitors, > without investing millions, could turn around and use that knowledge against > them? You're basically saying that something like Android cannot work, since there are multiple competing suppliers that use the same knowledge? > Out of the goodness of their own humanity? I think not. > > People are going to randomly create things things that make their life > easier or better. A patent(in a perfect world) helps motivate someone or > business by ensuring that their investment in time and money will be a good > one. I believe you must have some form of this in a free market economy. Yes > it may be riddled with problems, yes at times it impedes growth, but without > it I would argue that a free market economy would fail. Sort of a two steps > forward, one step back approach as apposed to a very small baby step > forward. > > What I am saying is that as a member of society, a citizen, I want to see the research that says that it's worth for me to pay for upholding monopolies by approving of patent law. And if it turns out to be not feasible, we should change it. > > > --- On *Thu, 4/8/10, Viktor Klang <viktor.kl...@gmail.com>* wrote: > > > From: Viktor Klang <viktor.kl...@gmail.com> > Subject: Re: [The Java Posse] Software Patents > To: javaposse@googlegroups.com > Date: Thursday, April 8, 2010, 3:12 PM > > > Oh, I apologize, I meant this: > > "The free market economic model is a lousy one, but it is the best by > far." <---- That sentence doesn't make sense. > > Connecting free markets with patents (artificial constraints) doesn't make > sense. Because I'm going out on a limb here and think it's "free" as in > freedom and not in beer? > > This will be a veeeery long discussion, but let's agree on that we got the > wheel, the fire, the agriculture and roads and clothes and a lot more > without any patents. So, saying that patents are needed to fuel innovation > is simply not true. > > On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 10:23 PM, Scott Melton > <scott_rides_ag...@yahoo.com<http://mc/compose?to=scott_rides_ag...@yahoo.com> > > wrote: > >> All of those sentences make sense to me... Maybe my wording isn't clear, >> sorry, I AM an engineer... >> >> I think I understand what you meant, but (in my opinion) it is not "the >> very purpose of patent law to reduce freedom in the market". I hope it is >> not even A purpose in a free market model. >> >> An unintended(hopefully) consequence of patent law is to reduce some >> freedom in a limited fashion for some people for a limited period of time >> with the intended purpose of rewarding innovators and preserving the concept >> of personal ownership. That would be my "rose colored glasses" way of >> looking at this complex problem/solution. >> >> I know very little about patent laws or their effect on any business model >> and did not intend on joining the discussion. I just wanted to point out a >> post that I thought was unpleasant and to encourage people to air their >> opinion, biased or not. I threw in an opinion to not be completely off >> topic. >> >> Please, you folks that know something about this issue, carry on. >> >> --- On *Thu, 4/8/10, Viktor Klang >> <viktor.kl...@gmail.com<http://mc/compose?to=viktor.kl...@gmail.com> >> >* wrote: >> >> >> From: Viktor Klang >> <viktor.kl...@gmail.com<http://mc/compose?to=viktor.kl...@gmail.com> >> > >> Subject: Re: [The Java Posse] Software Patents and Joe bashing >> To: >> javaposse@googlegroups.com<http://mc/compose?to=javapo...@googlegroups.com> >> Date: Thursday, April 8, 2010, 11:58 AM >> >> >> >> On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 7:54 PM, Scott Melton >> <scott_rides_ag...@yahoo.com<http://mc/compose?to=scott_rides_ag...@yahoo.com> >> > wrote: >> >>> Not knowing much about anyone making the decisions(other than they are >>> human, most of them), simply greedy, applied to this complex problem, would >>> be an over simplification. A component of the problem? Sure. >>> >>> Assuming they are more knowledgeable about patent law than I am is a >>> given. I can only hope that the process involves experts in the field they >>> are ruling over with some system of checks and balances. A false hope maybe. >>> If so then that is part of the process that is broken. >>> >>> The free market economic model is a lousy one, but it is the best by far. >>> >> >> >> That sentence doesn't make sense. The very purpose of patent law is to >> reduce freedom in the market. >> A patent is a virtual monopoly, reducing manufacturing competition and >> process efficiency. >> >> >>> Government intrusion on this model is a rarely helpful yet necessary >>> weevil. Caution should be to limit it where ever possible. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Opinion sent from my ASS phone. >>> >>> --- On *Thu, 4/8/10, Mark Volkmann >>> <r.mark.volkm...@gmail.com<http://mc/compose?to=r.mark.volkm...@gmail.com> >>> >* wrote: >>> >>> >>> From: Mark Volkmann >>> <r.mark.volkm...@gmail.com<http://mc/compose?to=r.mark.volkm...@gmail.com> >>> > >>> Subject: Re: [The Java Posse] Software Patents and Joe bashing >>> To: >>> javaposse@googlegroups.com<http://mc/compose?to=javapo...@googlegroups.com> >>> Date: Thursday, April 8, 2010, 10:49 AM >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 11:12 AM, Scott Melton < >>> scott_rides_ag...@yahoo.com<http://mc/compose?to=scott_rides_ag...@yahoo.com> >>> > wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> In a free and open society it is easy to find fault in complicated >>>> systems, just as it is easy to have a bias, pick sides and misrepresent the >>>> facts. One example in this thread, I may be wrong, but I think there is >>>> good >>>> reason for simplifying the patent granting process from who invented it >>>> first(which can be very difficult and costly to prove) to who filed first. >>>> Is the change a choice between the lesser of two weavels? Certainly. >>>> Infinitely more knowledgeable people than I made the decision. I will side >>>> with them until I become a patent lawyer or become so well informed that I >>>> can pass judgment on this complicated system. >>> >>> >>> Why do you assume the people responsible for our current patent system >>> are more knowledgeable than you rather than simply more greedy? >>> >>> -- >>> R. Mark Volkmann >>> Object Computing, Inc. >>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>> "The Java Posse" group. >>> To post to this group, send email to >>> javaposse@googlegroups.com<http://mc/compose?to=javapo...@googlegroups.com> >>> . >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>> javaposse+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<http://mc/compose?to=javaposse%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> >>> . >>> For more options, visit this group at >>> http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en. >>> >>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>> "The Java Posse" group. >>> To post to this group, send email to >>> javaposse@googlegroups.com<http://mc/compose?to=javapo...@googlegroups.com> >>> . >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>> javaposse+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<http://mc/compose?to=javaposse%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> >>> . >>> For more options, visit this group at >>> http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en. >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Viktor Klang >> | "A complex system that works is invariably >> | found to have evolved from a simple system >> | that worked." - John Gall >> >> Akka - the Actor Kernel: Akkasource.org >> Twttr: twitter.com/viktorklang >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "The Java Posse" group. >> To post to this group, send email to >> javaposse@googlegroups.com<http://mc/compose?to=javapo...@googlegroups.com> >> . >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> javaposse+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<http://mc/compose?to=javaposse%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> >> . >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en. >> >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "The Java Posse" group. >> To post to this group, send email to >> javaposse@googlegroups.com<http://mc/compose?to=javapo...@googlegroups.com> >> . >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> javaposse+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<http://mc/compose?to=javaposse%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> >> . >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en. >> > > > > -- > Viktor Klang > | "A complex system that works is invariably > | found to have evolved from a simple system > | that worked." - John Gall > > Akka - the Actor Kernel: Akkasource.org > Twttr: twitter.com/viktorklang > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "The Java Posse" group. > To post to this group, send email to javapo...@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > javaposse+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<javaposse%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en. > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "The Java Posse" group. > To post to this group, send email to javapo...@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > javaposse+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<javaposse%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en. > -- Viktor Klang | "A complex system that works is invariably | found to have evolved from a simple system | that worked." - John Gall Akka - the Actor Kernel: Akkasource.org Twttr: twitter.com/viktorklang -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to javapo...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to javaposse+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
