
Let’s Compete on Innovation Rather Than Patents - DanielRibeiro
http://techcrunch.com/2011/01/15/lets-compete-on-innovation/
======
juhygtfghjk
Our plan to destroy chinese industry is 50% complete, now if only we can get
them to adopt Powerpoint, 6sigma and management consultancy their
competitiveness will be destroyed.

<evil genius laugh>

~~~
azakai
Actually that was my reaction to the article. I don't know if he's right in
his depiction of what China is doing, but if he is, it sounds like they are
making all the mistakes the US is, with allowing too many patents - but much
more so. So they'll end up screwing themselves.

------
DaniFong
My take on patents...

[http://daniellefong.com/2010/02/11/how-law-shapes-the-
busine...](http://daniellefong.com/2010/02/11/how-law-shapes-the-business-
landscape-and-a-patent-puzzle/)

~~~
bradleyland
I'm only about half way through, but I'm absolutely loving it. Stashed to
Instapaper for later.

------
ZeroGravitas
I was under the impression that the Chinese government was moving to
encourage/enforce Royalty Free standards nationally, with the threat of simply
losing your patent if you try to ambush a standard.

On second thought this probably still would work, with Chinese companies still
able to collect standards taxes on things like LTE elsewhere in the world
until other governments catch on that China is now playing their game (since
China was on the receiving end of this for things like DVD players where
patent royalties have been up to a third of the consumer sales price in 2007,
possibly more now. Source:
[http://www.ppionline.org/ppi_ci.cfm?knlgAreaID=108&subse...](http://www.ppionline.org/ppi_ci.cfm?knlgAreaID=108&subsecid=900003&contentid=254366))

I wonder how much impact there will be to the whole Apple web now being
strongly supportive of royalty bearing standards?

------
nickpinkston
TL;DR:

[Getting China to adopt a patent system in harmony with Western systems will
lead to A LOT of frivolousness as the system already has bad incentives /
outcomes.

Also, patents should be removed for rapidly changing industries (i.e.
software), but should be retained for long term plays (bio-tech, industrial
processes, etc.)]

I'll completely agree that China shouldn't follow our lead, and that we should
remove software patents. However, I'd go further and say that we probably
would have faster moving bio-tech, etc. industries if we forced more
competition by NOT GRANTING them government monopolies to commercialize a
technology (i.e. patent).

~~~
secretasiandan
Your second and third paragraphs appear to be in conflict re bio-tech unless
"faster moving" doesn't trump any negative side effects of removing patents.
Can you elaborate?

I can see the argument for patents in areas like biotech where there's a huge
up front cost in development and testing. But if the cost is really all in
testing, then I think patents should be removed.

Additionally, I think patents should be much shorter since I believe
returns/earnings on monopoly power today can be much greater than it was back
when the patent duration was established.

~~~
nickpinkston
I think bio-tech is VERY fat right now. There was a 2005 study of new drugs
submitted for patent - I believe it was something like: 7 out of 80 were
curing new diseases or improved ways of treating current one. The others being
"me-too" drugs trying to get around patents - this means that the majority of
research is actually going towards getting around others' patents - what a
waste of resources!

Oh yea - who made those 7 drugs? All publicly funded (NSF/NIH) through
universities. So who's incentives are these patents helping?

I think we should selectively subsidize the FDA approval process so we can
commercialize drugs for real diseases. I'm fine with companies submitting
vanity drugs (Latisse for eyelashes or something), but they have to pay full
price.

------
alain94040
I wrote this opinion piece for VentureBeat a while back, and I stand by it. In
fast moving industries like software, some innovation deserves to be protected
in some way, but nowhere close to the 20 years that the current patent system
allows.

[http://venturebeat.com/2010/03/04/in-favor-of-software-
paten...](http://venturebeat.com/2010/03/04/in-favor-of-software-patents/)

------
manish_chhabra
Well, if you hold a patent that does not mean you will build, enhance or use
your patented stuff but it only prevents others from using it! I am completely
against it.

------
zemanel
ok, you first

------
EGreg
US and Britain to China: "your censorship of the internet is evil!"

Then when copyright gets involved...

Britain passes [https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2010/04/u-k-passes-internet-
di...](https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2010/04/u-k-passes-internet-
disconnection-law)

[http://www.zeropaid.com/news/91378/feds-seize-domain-
names-o...](http://www.zeropaid.com/news/91378/feds-seize-domain-names-of-
counterfeiters-and-pirates/)

The same western nations that are against censorship of the internet in China,
seem to even drop due process as soon as copyright comes up. I am not sure
this situation is very stable -- something has to change.

Similarly with patents. I'm glad the media is waking up when China gets
involved :)

