Intellectual Property and Economic Prosperity: Friends or Foes?
One of the USPTO report’s most frequently discussed findings was that “IP-intensive” industries employ a lot of people: “Direct employment in the subset of most IP-intensive industries identified in this report amounted to 27.1 million jobs in 2010, while indirect activities associated with these industries provided an additional 12.9 million jobs throughout the economy in 2010, for a total of 40.0 million jobs, or 27.7 percent of all jobs in the economy.”
Previous comments... You are currently on page 4.
I used to work for a courier service... what intellectual property did they base it all on, exactly?
FOR A LIMITED PERIOD OF TIME, WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THEREAFTER IT WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR OTHER INNOVATORS TO FURTHER DEVELOP AND EXPAND UPON.
I see no more purpose in the government granting patent and copyright protections than I see in the government recognizing marriages; if the society as a whole doesn't get to benefit from said protections/recognitions, then why waste time and bureaucracy on it? Just let inventors invent and protect their own intellectual property rights.
But if we're going to grant this limited protection, then by God we should get something for it. And that something is eventual access to the intellectual property.
You have the cart before the horse.
I know, because evidently you and your husband value nothing except money, that it must be difficult for you to understand doing something for the joy of doing it (presuming either of you know what "joy" is).
The personal computer revolution got its start, and its impetus, NOT from money grubbing lawyers out to make a buck, but from hackers whose motivation and reward was not making a buck, but in exploring computer systems, in innovating and creating.
Some of them got very, very wealthy, which is just, but they would have done it anyway.
It seems to me that you and your husband are arguing against generosity, confusing it with altruism. And maybe on purpose.
It also occurs to me that your husband (and therefore you) only has a hammer, and so all issues resemble nails to him.
He's almost as one-issue as Maph.
If they were opposed to private property, as you try to pretend, they would have released the source code and not *licensed* it at all.
See my reply to your husband.
" having a socialist Utopian dream today H? "
No, khalling; simply recognizing that there are rewards in life that don't involve the rustle and clink of money. If I get off on giving happy meals to bums sitting on street corners... there's my reward, and a big fat f* you to anyone who criticizes me for doing what I find rewarding with my property, intellectual or otherwise.
It takes truly simple minds to disparage rewards that don't involve the exchange of monetary tokens.
Why do so many objectivists have this blind spot to the fact that there are profits be gained by other than money?
The Linux kernel was developed by Linus Torvalds independently.
http://www.linfo.org/linus.html
--------
Consequently, Torvalds attempted to obtain a version of UNIX for his new computer. Fortunately (for the world), he could not find even a basic system for less than US$5,000. He also considered MINIX, a small clone of UNIX that was created by operating systems expert Andrew Tanenbaum in the Netherlands to teach UNIX to university students. However, although much more powerful than MS-DOS and designed to run on Intel x86 processors, MINIX still had some serious disadvantages. They included the facts that not all of the source code was made public, it lacked some of the features and performance of UNIX and there was a not-insignificant (although cheaper than for many other operating systems) licensing fee.
Source code is the version of software (e.g., an operating system or an application program) as it is originally written (i.e., typed into a computer) by a human using a programming language (such as assembly, BASIC, C or Java) and before it is compiled (i.e., converted by a compiler) into machine language, which the processor (but not humans) can understand directly. Having the source code is necessary in order to study or improve software. A highly skilled programmer such as Torvalds can easily become bored and frustrated with software for which the source code is not available.
Torvalds thus decided to create a new operating system from scratch that was based on both MINIX and UNIX. It is unlikely that he was fully aware of the tremendous amount of work that would be necessary, and it is even far less likely that he could have envisioned the effects that his decision would have both on his life and on the rest of the world. Because university education in Finland is free and there was little pressure to graduate within four years, Torvalds decided to take a break and devote his full attention to his project.
--------
Gates had become fabulously wealthy, whereas Torvalds was making close to nothing from his free software. He was subsisting only on an average programmer's salary, and he and his family were living in a modest duplex in an ordinary neighborhood. Actually, Torvalds was never really interested in accumulating wealth or power, and he has contended all along that what counts most for the best programmers is the joy of programming and being creative. In his own words, he did it all "just for fun." Nevertheless, he was subsequently rewarded with both wealth and power, and he has not been reluctant to admit that money has its advantages.
Torvalds' financial situation changed dramatically in 1999. Red Hat and VA Linux (now VA Software), both leading developers of Linux-based software packages for large enterprises, had presented him with stock options in gratitude for his creation. Torvalds suddenly became a millionaire when Red Hat went public, and his net worth temporarily soared to roughly $20 million when VA Linux went public later that year.
---------------
Linux use has grown rapidly not only in terms of the total number of installations but also in terms of the diversity of the systems on which it is operated. Particularly impressive has been its growing share in the market for servers, the centralized computers that power corporate networks and the Internet. Many industry experts are convinced that it is only a matter of just a few years before Linux replaces the proprietary UNIXs as the dominant operating system in the world's largest corporate data centers.
Equally impressive has been the growth at the opposite end of the applications spectrum, i.e., for use in embedded systems. These are single chips (or circuit boards) which contain simplified versions of Linux and which are incorporated into everything from mobile phones to industrial robots. Among the advantages of using Linux in embedded systems are portability (i.e., ability to run on almost any type of processor), flexibility (i.e., ease of configuring), low cost (i.e., no licensing fees) and the availability of efficient and low cost development tools.
----------------
What you got against trading value for value, or a person using his creation as he sees fit?
Patent Office Protection is an exclusive right to prevent anyone else from profiting from our creation. I also include Copywright.
Sorry for the convolution. IP unprotected is what Linux offers with open source. Windows XXX.XXX is patented and not open source.
Which benefits the (sarcasm) "Greater Society" more, stuff you have to compensate the creator to have, or stuff you get without cost?
Hope that makes it clearer?
PROPERTY RIGHTS ARE THE MORAL ISSUE OF OUR TIME
your last statement about IP vs Patent Office is a little convoluted. whenever I see "benefit to the larger society" I run the other way...can you clarify? oh and point for making phrase of the day on Euda's post
No one is going to agree with me here, in the land of Ayn Rand objective reasoned Libertarians because what we "practice" is not the "law" we ignore because it has not YET born consequence to us.
First, there is no such thing as "personal property", Intellectual or protected by patent since 1913. That is the year Americans became subject to Income Tax, which claims all wealth of its citizens right down to the metabolism of brain and muscle. The 16th Amendment of the Constitution states: "The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several states, and without regard to any census of enumeration." Coincident with this, the Federal Reserve System was created on Christmas Eve 12-23-1913 ch. 6, 38 Stat. 251, enacted December 23, 1913, 12 U.S.C. ch. 3.
In 1933 under Executive Order 6102 President Roosevelt forbad the ownership of gold. This was possible only when American citizens ceased to be "sovereign" as defined in the Declaration of Independence: in excerpt "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness---" Being born free, sovereign, and pursuing "happiness" (profit) we were sovereign because we 1) owned ourselves, gift of the Creator 2) possessed Life,Liberty, and PROPERTY. 3) Anything we expended of Life to"get", as Liberty possessing Sovereign citizens, was ours to keep. The cost of government was apportioned and assessed to our "happiness" according to enumerated census.
Executive Order 11110 was issued by U.S. President John F. Kennedy on June 4, 1963. Attempted to reestablish property ownership to Americans while gold ownership remained illegal. Silver Certificate (bank notes) money were abolished and taken out of circulation after the President was assassinated.
August 15, 1971 President Nixon took America off the gold standard and our money became backed ONLY by debt establishing the "mandrake mechanism" where fractional reserve banking causes 20:1 inflation and repayment of principle extinguishes currency (bank notes) by the lending / repayment cycle.
The FED Federal Reserve Bank system is a cartel of 12 regional banks who now own everything including human citizens. Lincoln abolished personal ownership of slaves, not governmental ownership of slaves. WHY DO WE GIVE A BLEEPING DAMN?
You should care because chattel slaves have no property rights. The FED cartel insinuated itself, as a private corporation, into the halls of government, with IRS enforcement FORCE AT THE POINT OF A GUN AND LITIGATION WITH INCARCERATION IN TAX COURT. This isn't just about money creation/debt/or economics. This means, the government, despite all other regulations / laws to the contrary, including the Constitution OWN YOUR MIND, YOUR BODY, YOUR TIME, YOUR LABOR, ANYTHING YOU CREATE AND INVENT OR PRODUCE.. President Jefferson's prophesy is realized. "If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of ALL THEIR PROPERTY until their children wake up homeless on the continent their Fathers conquered...I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies... The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs."
IP V.S. Patent Office are arguments to the contrary and in PRACTICE chattel tribute slaves are protected and there is an argument between the rights of creators and the economic benefit to the larger society as opposed to the inventor protected under USPTO patent protection.
So after this trip on a long and narrow road to a little house in the prairie, the bottom line is: THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS PRIVATE PROPERTY IN THE UNITED STATES AND EVERY ARGUMENT ABOUT WHO OWNS WHAT AND WHO IS DAMAGING THE ECONOMY IS A MOOT ARGUMENT FOR RUMINATORS WHO HAVE NO CUD LEFT. http://www.thefreedictionary.com/ruminat...
"Some people are actually motivated by other than dollar signs" having a socialist Utopian dream today H?
"if inventions are held in common, they tend to stagnate."
Then explain Blender and Linux.
Some people are actually motivated by other than dollar signs.
Load more comments...