Trent W. Buck wrote:
Tim Connors <tim.w.connors@gmail.com> writes:
Some people might want to respond to the one sided article here: https://theconversation.com/grants-arent-helping-australian-tech-but-patent-... IMO Macaulay's observation on copyright applies equally to patents, viz.
| Yet monopoly is an evil. For the sake of the good we must submit to | the evil; but the evil ought not to last a day longer than is | necessary for the purpose of securing the good.
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Copyright_Law_(Macaulay) https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Second_Speech_on_Copyright_Law
Patents are limited monopolies granted in exchange for publication of what would otherwise remain trade secrets.
Let's put the question this way if patents, in Australia were eliminated; which is what a generalisation of the open-source software development philosophy might suggest; would R&D opportunities in Australia improve ? It is I think important to recall that a 'patent' is really just a "title to an idea" and as such is much like a generalisation of a design registration, which is more like a "title to a prototype". I wonder whether eliminating patents; making patents much cheaper or enforcement costs lower' is really the issue. The Australia market is tiny; so obviously an export orientation is vital; but smaller nations than Australia seem to manage. As a 'sometime' aspiring inventor my sense is that the Australian venture capital market is quite unsophisticated compared to say; that in California. There is an interesting essay entitled "What is the Difference Between Gambling and Investing" here http://www.investorguide.com/article/12525/what-is-the-difference-between-ga... <http://www.investorguide.com/article/12525/what-is-the-difference-between-gambling-and-investing/#comment-430009> and my own thoughts here Gambling_Investment_and_Stochastic_Profit.pdf https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0aOfcVEMVoKWHZRNlNGdFg3TlE/edit?usp=sharin... regards Rohan McLeod