Hacker News Reader

Comment by chimpanzee | Hacker News Reader

Essentially: “information wants to be free”.

I agree.

But this must include the dissolution of patents. Otherwise corporations and the owners of the infrastructure will simply control everything, including the easily replicable works of individuals.

View on HN

At least patents only last 20 years as opposed to nearly over a century for copyright.

In practice it's often longer. Drug companies queue up minor tweaks to their formulas and can threaten to sue anyone even close to the new way, even carbon copies of the now expired patent. Few can afford to win a lawsuit.

We need more courts and judges to speed the process, to make justice more accessible, and universal SLAPP protections to weed out frivolous abuse.

True, though at least with drugs if there's a shortage compounding pharmacies are given broad freedom outside the patent holder's control. See semaglutide.

Sad that we rely on the scraps these captured regulators let fall through the cracks. At least until their patrons awake and close those loopholes.

I am against dissolution of patents if the technology took lot of research. In this case the patent protects from others copying the result of research.

However, obvious patents like "a computer system with a display displaying a product and a button to order it" should not be allowed. Also, software patents should not exist (copyright is enough).

What if all that research led to some incredible world changing for the better idea/concept/product in an open society that would benefit everyone, in the closed society only those allowed to use the patent benefit

Who would pay for the years of research in the open society?

It's not black and white. Even the United States, the government can, under certain circumstances, use a patented invention without the patent holder's permission. And it's even more common in other countries.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com