Mercurial > thoughts

     1 #+title: Thoughts on Patents

     2 #+author: Robert McIntyre

     3 #+email: rlm@mit.edu

     4 #+description: 

     5 #+keywords: 

     6 #+SETUPFILE: ../../aurellem/org/setup.org

     7 #+INCLUDE: ../../aurellem/org/level-0.org

     8 

     9 

    10 (This is all based on my knowledge of American patent/copyright law.)

    11 

    12 * Copyright is normally a negative force

    13 

    14 

    15 

    16 * GPL uses copyright as a positive force

    17 

    18 * Patents generally an inhibitive force.

    19 

    20   Patents are usually a negative force, one that allows you to stop

    21   other entities from using knowledge to their own advantage.

    22 

    23 * Google has created "neutral" patents via a pledge which attaches conditions to its patents.

    24   Google has a pledge at

    25   http://www.google.com/patents/opnpledge/pledge/ that says that for

    26   certain specified patents "we pledge not to sue any user,

    27   distributor or developer of open-source software on specified

    28   patents, unless first attacked."

    29 

    30   This is an interesting statement to me. With this pledge, Google has

    31   created "neutral" patents that allow open source software to

    32   develop, but do not particurally encourage it to develop. They have

    33   done this by attaching legally binding conditions on the enforcement

    34   of their patents via a pledge.

    35 

    36 * Positive Patents

    37   We can create patents that actively encourage openness by emulating

    38   the GPL. What it would take is a company that issues a more

    39   agressive pledge about its patents; Something along the lines of:

    40   

    41 #+begin_quote

    42   The Positive Patent Pledge, v0.1

    43 

    44   "We pledge to sue any entity that tries to sell/distribute any

    45   product that is covered by our patents. We will not settle for any

    46   amount of money but will instead ensure that the product will never

    47   see market, as is our right under patent law. 

    48 

    49   The only exception is if the product is open (all code/methods of

    50   construction is made pubically available under an open license), and

    51   the entity makes this same pledge for any patents relating to the

    52   product."

    53 #+end_quote

    54 

    55   This pledge, if taken by a company with enough patents, would slowly

    56   destroy the patent system by contaminating the entire patent network

    57   with patents that infect all dependent patents with this

    58   pledge. Companies that are considering patenting something will

    59   think twice, since they don't want to be responsible for costly

    60   legal battles with no monetary reward. They would be better off

    61   releasing their work to the public domain than patenting it.

    62 

    63   How might this hypothetical company (which is basically a noble

    64   patent trolling company) gain control of patents? They could use the

    65   normal patent troll methods of buying bulk patents from companies

    66   that are going out of business. However, they could also gather

    67   patents from individuals and companies who believe that the patent

    68   system is harmful to innovation, and simply donate their patents to

    69   the cause.

    70 

    71   How could this get enough money to fight these legal battles?

    72   Perhaps there could be a possibility of settling for money and

    73   requiring the company to make their relevant patents merely neutral

    74   instead of positive. Then, the positive patent pledge could read:

    75 

    76 #+begin_quote

    77   The Positive Patent Pledge v0.2

    78 

    79   "We pledge to sue any entity that tries to sell/distribute any

    80   product that is covered by our patents. We will not settle for any

    81   amount of money but will instead ensure that the product will never

    82   see market, as is our right under patent law. 

    83 

    84   The only exception is if the product is open (all code/methods of

    85   construction is made pubically available under an open license), and

    86   the entity makes this same pledge for any patents relating to the

    87   product, the entity can take the Google 'neutral patent pledge'

    88   instead of this pledge if they are a 'special exception'.

    89 #+end_quote

    90   

    91   The only way for a company to become a special exception would be

    92   for them to contribute monetairly to this hypothetical company.

    93 

    94
author	Robert McIntyre <rlm@mit.edu>
date	Mon, 01 Apr 2013 15:14:39 +0000
parents	c6ac92057526
children	e4ee3818a033