this post was submitted on 23 May 2024
166 points (99.4% liked)

politics

19104 readers
2770 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Veraxus 10 points 5 months ago (3 children)

Abuse is a feature.

The mere existence of patents is abuse, theft, and bald-faced corruption. Burn the system to the ground.

[–] CaptainPedantic 18 points 5 months ago (2 children)

I invent something. Since there are no patents, my idea is put in the open. A big company sees my idea and uses its much bigger budget to advertise and out sell me, putting me out of business. How's that not abusive?

Patents prevent theft. Patents on medicine based on publicly funded research is stupid. I could be persuaded that it's theft in that particular instance. But in general, no patents are not theft.

[–] msbeta1421 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Exactly. IP law is foundational to any functioning market economy. Reform == Delete

[–] Hackworth 2 points 5 months ago

IP isn't going to withstand generative AI, at least not in a recognizable form. I don't know what that means for the market.

[–] Veraxus -4 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (3 children)

That almost made sense in the age of the cotton gin. It does not any more. All patents are abuse. Always. Every time.

Case in point: you “invent” something (which is guaranteed to be something - or a combination of somethings - that are already extant, btw)… a corporation…

  1. Already has a similar patent and crushes you with the sheer legal corruption and power that comes with ostentatious wealth.

  2. Files the patent before or via other loophole supersedes your filing… and THEN crushes you with sheer legal corruption and power that comes with ostentatious wealth.

Either way, they win. And even if you win, chances are you’ve merely stolen some concept that should always have been public domain, anyway.

You see this as a way to fight against wealthy corporations, but no matter how you swing it, it’s theft. It’s plain old theft from society and the public… and the bigger and wealthier you are, the more you can steal. Just because “little guys” can sometimes engage in such legally-protected theft doesn’t make it any less theft.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Oh, to live in your clueless bubble...

[–] Veraxus 1 points 5 months ago

We collected all the clues and logged them as evidence. They are evidence now. You should look at them some time instead of burying your head in the sand and imagining your own.

[–] denshirenji 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

You don't know as much as you think you do.

[–] Veraxus 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

What a profound, meaningful, and thought-provoking response. You sure got me!

[–] denshirenji 3 points 5 months ago

I agree that by and large most patent law is rigged in favor of corporations. All I'm saying is that things are always more complex than simple black and white. I chose a simple response because I believe that you have already made up your mind and it would be a very difficult and nigh impossible conversation. I do like the energy that you put into looking out for people though and that should be commended.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

How would funding work, then? If everything I do is available to the public with no protections on my end, then I can’t guarantee that I (the inventor) will ever be able to extract any value from some thing that I put a lot of time and effort into developing. Considering we live in a capitalist society, there needs to be a way to reimburse inventors.

As the person above me pointed out, how do you prevent a large company on capitalising on ideas that a small inventor has?

[–] Veraxus 1 points 5 months ago

Considering we live in a capitalist society, there needs to be a way to reimburse inventors.

As the person above me pointed out, how do you prevent a large company on capitalising on ideas that a small inventor has?

This is your answer. The problem is Capitalism and enabling/perpetuating tools of Capitalist abuse is no solution at all. Under our current system, the thing you ask “how do we prevent” is currently happening. it does not provide protection for “small inventors” - it provides a way for big companies to churn put patents by the hundreds/thousands/millions.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 5 months ago

I wouldn't go that far in terms of patents in general but patents on medications definitely, especially if the research that went into them were funded using tax dollars.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 5 months ago

They don’t want to actually fix anything, just to complain about it and blame it on someone else.