People often start from the mistaken notion that patents are a right, or that they are part of our constitutional foundation.
Both these notions run counter to the fundamental idea that laws exist for the betterment of society as a whole, not to make individuals rich. Even the original phrasing of our Constitution clearly states that the ability for Congress to grant exclusive rights to “inventors” is expressly for the purpose of advancing the arts and sciences. It says nothing about any other purpose.
I believe the original wording, and I think it should be taken quite literally. In a world where people needed no economic incentives to come up with ideas, allowing all ideas to be used freely is always equal to or better than applying restrictions — hopefully that is self evident. So the question of whether or not to extend patent protection to a field should be exclusively concerned with whether or not it increases the number of and application of good ideas.
Why Software Patents are Bad, Period.
from Why Software Patents are Bad, Period.
- **Ag-gag** laws are anti-[whistleblower](https://en.wikipedia.org/w...from Matt McGrath
- No chief executive officer of a big company wants to file for bankr...from Matt Levine
- While today there’s a wide distance between GDPR, CCPA, HITRUST, Fe...from lethain.com
- One interesting and possibly even true thing that I learned in law ...from Matt Levine
- And regulations are written in blood, so we’ll only get enforced le...from buttondown.email
- I have seethed as generations of Democrats have argued that if we c...from www.thecut.com