ESP Wiki is looking for moderators and active contributors!

Blocking innovation and research

Revision as of 14:46, 29 May 2010 by 89.17.210.161 (talk) (Analyses)

Software patents block innovation and research. This is in addition to the decades of proof that software progress happens without patents.

XzC8Io <a href="http://yaogdvtdaypl.com/">yaogdvtdaypl</a>, [url=http://zfzxklaggdir.com/]zfzxklaggdir[/url], [link=http://qxqbyhtjhaee.com/]qxqbyhtjhaee[/link], http://hzeclyumvhuq.com/

Studies

For a full list, see Studies on economics and innovation. Here we highlight a few:

Examples

When explaining why Google were not supporting the patent-free Ogg Theora codec, Chris DiBona repled "here's the challenge: Can theora move forward without infringing on the other video compression patents?".[1]

Most software innovation happens through leap-frogging: company A comes up with an idea, company B replicates it with extra features or improvements, company A improves it further. This process is in the interests of innovation and in the interests of the consumer. It expands the market, and very often both A and B benefit from it. Patenting can only slow this process down, to the detriment of the consumer, the market, and the companies who supply that market.

Very often the first company with an idea doesn't get it quite right, or fails to realise its true potential. Their product fails because they execute it badly or market it badly. Another company then builds on the idea and succeeds where the first company failed. (Example: the Wang object technology patents, acquired by Kodak after Wang failed, versus Sun - HELP: more details necessary!) Should the patent system reward failure?

External links

References