(25) Patents impede growth of progress ? Part 2

He wrote:
Patents are design to turn ideas into a form that can then be governed by traditional property rights and laws. It was created during the Victorian age  when that was the best system that they had. That's why, its relevance today is questioned and its flaws are becoming more apparent. 

Can you specify which part is irrelevant today? Maybe, only those parts which are irrelevant should be modified or change. Not the whole concept of IP protection.

He wrote:
If you share your idea with me, now there are 2 brains with the idea. If 100  people share the idea, we now have 100 houses instead of 1. So, the sum total is increased.

From a commercial or business point of view, 100 people mean 100 competitors. Example like if you fried the best char kueh teow in the world. Would you start teaching 100 ther people your secret. Would it be any good to you that there will be 100 other stalls which can now serve the same delicious char kueh teow. What if some start their stall next door to you?

He wrote:
Now, the thing is, you are *not* deprived of one iota of your idea. You still have it. That's the beauty of ideas. Nobody can take them away from you no matter how hard they try. In other words, you still have your house, and now 100 other people have houses too!

Now, there are 100 stalls. Some of them may be next door to you. You still have the recipe and idea of how to fried the best char kueh teow. Nobody can take that away from you no matter how hard they tried. You still have your stall and so does 100 other people.... 100 competitors, you might call them now.

He wrote:
Now I'll tell you your advantage. You still have your house and you can rent it, sell it, lease it and what nots. You can still turn a _profit_ on your house. Nobody's stopping you from doing any of that.
If my house is the only house, I can demand a premiun rental for it. If there are 100 other houses beside, behind and in front of mine, it will be a difficult position. Now, why do I want the 100 houses to be there if I can help it?

He wrote:
You mentioned that competition can kill you. Isn't that the reason why the market works? Good products will survive while bad ones will fail. Now, if we think that the free market is bad, then that is another debate altogether.

I always believe in free market. Free does not that you have the right to be wrong. Free market doesn't mean you have the right to do pirated DVD. Yes, good product will survive and the bad ones will fail. Having IP protection can mean that those 'not so good' products will survive.

Having a patent can be like having a rich parents. There are some very bright kids who could not go further in their education because they are poor. While the not so bright ones gets there because their parents are rich and can effort them. Is this fair? Is this good for mankind?

If this is not to be, why would a parent want to work hard and be rich? What you believe is only good for one generation. That's what Chairman Mao Tze Tung's idelogy too.

He wrote:
In fact, patents produce the exact opposite result. They promote protectionism and monopolies while stifling market growth and competition.

You are wrong in this. All these protections is a kind of reward for your hardwork. If there is no reward, no incentives, nobody will take an extra step to progress. Look at China.

Don't worry, your communication skill is perfect...




~