Patent Laws

[RNK]

Here's a hypothetical question:

What do you think would happen if patent laws were suddenly abolished?

A bit of history on the patent:

It started out during the fuedal ages when nobility would grant special charters to favoured manufacturers and handicraftsmen, giving them a monopolization on a certain product or style of production.

Naturally, this essentially gave rise to the modern bourgeoisie. Manufacturers who remained in good standing with their nobility were able to amass great wealth, greatly surpassing what they would otherwise have been able to collect. Their domination by the nobility remained, however, until one by one the nobility of old were brought down (the "bourgeoisie revolution") and these priviledged citizens used their wealth and positions in society to take over the reigns. The modern democratic society was created.

So what would happen if these patent laws were abolished next week?

[JazzRemington]

This is a coincidence. I'm just coming from Slashdot and I saw an article that says that the US is working to change the patent system to basically who files first, as opposed to who invented first.

[colonelguppy]

i don't favor outright abolishment of copyrights, but i think their scope should be reduced. i find "intellectual property" a bullshit concept.

[Jude]

Patents are rediculous! How can one 'own' an idea? Did you know that species can be patented? Think about it for a little bit... some rich lab coat out there "owns" AIDs! Literally. Same goes for a newly discovered species of bird in Indonesia. And someone actualy has to pay royalties on AIDs research. As far as I'm concerned, though, It won't be gone until the Dollar is, too.

[cormacobear]

A Small reward can be given based on the category of your contribution, naming rights afterwords the idea would be published for free access and if plausible be put into production.

Most inventors don't end up wealthy the investors who produce and distribute a product get the lions share.

the system now doesn't work so changing it to be more equitable and with wider access will speed up R&D. for everyones benefit.

- oh yah almost forgot they can have a handshake and a thankyou too.

[RebelDog]

Property is theft. Information, material things should all collectively belong to the human race.

[Demogorgon]

Interestngly some capitalist countries avoided having patent laws until well into the twentieth century. I am not sure how much difference it made though

[colonelguppy]

Originally posted by [email protected] 19, 2007 11:36 pm
Patents are rediculous! How can one 'own' an idea? Did you know that species can be patented? Think about it for a little bit... some rich lab coat out there "owns" AIDs! Literally. Same goes for a newly discovered species of bird in Indonesia. And someone actualy has to pay royalties on AIDs research. As far as I'm concerned, though, It won't be gone until the Dollar is, too.
i've never heard od this. patenting a species?

[pusher robot]

Originally posted by [email protected] 20, 2007 04:36 am
Did you know that species can be patented? Think about it for a little bit... some rich lab coat out there "owns" AIDs! Literally. Same goes for a newly discovered species of bird in Indonesia. And someone actualy has to pay royalties on AIDs research.
That's utterly incorrect, at least in the United States. You can patent unique genome sequences that you create, and that's all. The relevant law is 35 U.S.C. § 103 (b)
(1) Notwithstanding subsection (a), and upon timely election by the applicant for patent to proceed under this subsection, a biotechnological process using or resulting in a composition of matter that is novel under section 102 and nonobvious under subsection (a) of this section shall be considered nonobvious if—
(A) claims to the process and the composition of matter are contained in either the same application for patent or in separate applications having the same effective filing date; and
(B) the composition of matter, and the process at the time it was invented, were owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person.
(2) A patent issued on a process under paragraph (1)—
(A) shall also contain the claims to the composition of matter used in or made by that process, or
(B) shall, if such composition of matter is claimed in another patent, be set to expire on the same date as such other patent, notwithstanding section 154.
(3) For purposes of paragraph (1), the term “biotechnological process” means—
(A) a process of genetically altering or otherwise inducing a single- or multi-celled organism to—
(i) express an exogenous nucleotide sequence,
(ii) inhibit, eliminate, augment, or alter expression of an endogenous nucleotide sequence, or
(iii) express a specific physiological characteristic not naturally associated with said organism;
(B) cell fusion procedures yielding a cell line that expresses a specific protein, such as a monoclonal antibody; and
© a method of using a product produced by a process defined by subparagraph (A) or (B), or a combination of subparagraphs (A) and (B).

Thus, the only species that could be patented is one that is newly created by genetic alteration.

[Jude]

I wouldn't say that itr was utterly incorrect... Anyway, i should have researched it a little more before putting my foot in my mouth. BTW, what site would one go on to find that (and other) laws, and is it dificult to maneuver quickly through this database?

[midnight marauder]

I wouldn't say that itr was utterly incorrect...

Good....cause it isn't.

From a quick google search:

This site (http://www.guardian.co.uk/genes/article/0,2763,397503,00.html) has a list of many different genes that have been applied to be patented.

Here's (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/13/opinion/13crichton.html?ex=1329022800&en=e94c0cfca7b400fe&ei=5090) another article on the implications of it.

[pusher robot]

Originally posted by [email protected] 20, 2007 04:56 pm
I wouldn't say that itr was utterly incorrect... Anyway, i should have researched it a little more before putting my foot in my mouth. BTW, what site would one go on to find that (and other) laws, and is it dificult to maneuver quickly through this database?
The official version is at http://www.gpoaccess.gov/uscode/index.html. It's not too hard to search if you know generally what you are looking for.

[Janus]

So what would happen if these patent laws were abolished next week?
I don't think there's a chance that such intellectual property laws can be abolished under capitalism as major profits would be lost by corporations, businesses,etc.


and I saw an article that says that the US is working to change the patent system to basically who files first, as opposed to who invented first.
? That is how it works currently, the patent is given to whomever files it first.

[pusher robot]

Originally posted by [email protected] 21, 2007 05:41 pm

So what would happen if these patent laws were abolished next week?
I don't think there's a chance that such intellectual property laws can be abolished under capitalism as major profits would be lost by corporations, businesses,etc.


and I saw an article that says that the US is working to change the patent system to basically who files first, as opposed to who invented first.
? That is how it works currently, the patent is given to whomever files it first.
Not in the U.S.