Hacker News Reader

Comment by wat10000 | Hacker News Reader

Where does "invention" end and "standard" begin? If I come up with a new and better way to transmit video between devices, should I be allowed to charge for the right to interoperate with it? What if I don't want any interoperability and it's just for my own hardware? What if I just want certain select partners?

View on HN

>Should I be allowed to charge for the right to interoperate with it?

No.

>What if ... just for my own hardware?

No.

>What if I just want certain select partners?

Sure, you can select between the DoD or Langley.

So anything which communicates between two pieces of hardware wouldn’t be covered by IP laws?

Ideally, yes.

Yes. It seems pretty obviously true to me that there should be no legal right to prevent interoperability and no recourse against adversarial interoperability.

The right to say "Compatible with X" or similar where X is a brand should also be protected.

So I sit down and invent some wonderful new interconnect. It would be be a big advantage to put it into certain kinds of video equipment. I don't make any video equipment, so I license it to companies that do. Should this be impossible? New communications tech should only be created as trade secrets, by industry-wide consortia, or altruists?

This is getting close to arguing against IP as a general concept. Which I don't really object to very strongly, but presenting it as a special carveout for communication doesn't make sense to me.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com