a perennial favorite topic of debate. sound off in the replies.

  • monobot
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Maybe you can argue that they wouldn’t have invented it unless they were incentivized by being able to weaponize the legal system as a result of their patent findings

    I am cool with that, they wouldn’t make it, but some else would. Maybe some years later, but globaly we would benefit much more.

    Same like 3D printers, technology is decades old, but started being used after patent expired. F*** them from slowing us down.

    Patents and copyright was invented so that invation would happen, but now corporations are ising them to hinder advancement.

    • Chobbes@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Yeah, exactly. Legal protections only really seem to work if you’re already a big enough corporation to afford it, so it doesn’t seem like patents and copyright really support independent creators as much as we would maybe like. It seems more often than not to be weaponized against progress for the sake of personal gains… and that just sucks. The only potential argument for these protections is that people wouldn’t invent or create things without them… Because all things being equal they benefit a select few people (rights holders), and otherwise serve no benefit to anybody else, often leading to stifled innovation and less competition.