-
Website
http://techliberation.com/ -
Original page
http://techliberation.com/2007/07/17/eminent-domain-software-patents-and-central-planning/ -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
The New York Times reported on May 20, 2007 in "A Housing Plan Turns Disney Grumpy" that SunCal Companies, a developer based in Irvine, signed a contract to buy 26 acres of land to build 1,300 condominiums and 225 rental units on the site. Disney does not want a residential development next to its park since Disney believes that it will discourage tourism.
As with copyright, Disney believes that it can change(create), at will, laws that deprive a person/corporation of its rights for the sole purpose of protecting Disney's value. Free market systems work through competition not protectionist legislation.
Thats funny, whenever an independent developer goes after a large firm, he's called a patent troll. Whenever a large firm goes after the small guy, he's called a bully. Sheeesshhh.
By the way, I"ve bought (real) property in planned communities. Yes, the benefits of living in a free market, socio-economic mobility, the ability to enjoy the pleasures of economic freedom.
Sounds like a mark of consistency because both sides are being attacked. Some of us are principled opponents of software patents, favoring the chaos of a more pure free market system with fewer restrictions.
I'd like Tim to explain whether the patent system has prevented any independent developers from entering a market in which they had some promising viability. My feelilng is that there are not many examples, and consequently little negative impact on innovating activity. Tim is, again, making mountains out of molehills.
Regarding the independent v politically entrenched battle Tim has introduced, well, thats life. Because we, in the US, are given some equality in the political process, many of us *expect* the same kind of equality in the creation of culture, influence on policy, and outcome of commercial activity- and those with more expectations are often the most disappointed by the reality that inquality of many sorts exists in a free market economy.
I would say that patent supporters in general try to impose a great deal of fairness. Tell me, Noel, where it is written in the universe that equality and fairness are part of life. While you can't defend taking away from someone what they have earned, you can easily defend someone making better use of another person's idea than they could themselves make.
My motivation for supporting a weak patent system is that I don't subscribe to a belief that life should be made fair. I fully support the right of a stronger, more intelligent person to expand on the work of a less capable person, without penalty provided they are expanding the idea and not products of the weaker person. Visceral competition was what made the IT industry strong, not the pay offs from getting the right patents.
However, he should have to consult the owner of the land before he starts building on it.
Tim, I think you have this analogy backwards, sideways, and even a bit upside down. As I wrote over at the The ACT Blog, the real parallel is between your friends in the anti-patent camp and these Soviet-style city planners.
Like the city players, the anti-patent forces also have a vision for a better neighborhood (software industry). It is beautiful: paved in gold, based on sharing and sharing alike, and devoid of any nasty software patents.
It’s such a beautiful vision, and the software industry now is so awful and blighted, they believe it justifies nuking the entire system of software patents.
They chant:
“We are smarter and can use those ideas better! I don’t care who owns them, let’s take them!”
“If we don’t have to worry about the property rights of others, just think of all the amazing things we could create!”
Government is empowered to grant some kinds of monopolies, but needs to back off when a monopoly would interfere with actual property or other Constitutionally protected rights.