

Patents do not protect small firms, says trade body - Isofarro
http://www.out-law.com//default.aspx

======
RiderOfGiraffes
Don't link to the front page - that changes. Link instead to the actual item:

<http://www.out-law.com/page-11668>

~~~
dhimes
SME Innovation Alliance original letter [pdf]: [http://www.smeia.org/smeia-
org/_img/sme/SMEIA_HMG_Growth_pol...](http://www.smeia.org/smeia-
org/_img/sme/SMEIA_HMG_Growth_policies.pdf)

It reads a bit like a rant. OT:

I wonder what PATRON means on that letterhead? Stephan Hawking is named.

------
iwwr
For people still in favor of patents (and/or copyright), I recommend skimming
through this:

Boldrin & Levine: "Against Intellectual Monopoly)

[http://levine.sscnet.ucla.edu/general/intellectual/against.h...](http://levine.sscnet.ucla.edu/general/intellectual/against.htm)

It's full or real life examples of how "intellectual monopoly" is harmful,
often to the monopolist itself.

~~~
DougBTX
Worth noting that this article is pro-patents, and goes on to encourage the
establishment of a body to fund patent disputes in court. It isn't clear where
that money will come from, but I don't see how it will help out anyone but IP
lawyers.

~~~
JoachimSchipper
Presumably, it would help the small corporations with lots of valuable IP. It
would be nice for patent trolls, too (start a new company, fund a battle out
of this fund, fold if you lose.)

------
binarymax
Glad the UK finally figured it out - but they are proposing a ridiculous
solution. It would be much more efficient to do away with software patents
altogether, instead of using tax money to fund corporate court battles.

------
mooism2
Direct link --- <http://www.out-law.com/page-11668>

