NY Times Comes Out Against The Broken Patent System

from the good-to-see dept

Following the recent NY Times article on how tax strategies are getting patented, the paper has come out with an opinion piece about how our patent system is broken and rewarding exactly the opposite behavior that it was intended to encourage: "Patents are supposed to encourage innovation, rewarding the individual for the greater good of society. But excessive or overly broad patents can slow business activity to the pace of cold molasses." This isn't anything new to plenty of folks, of course. However, it is good to see a publication like the NY Times make the point as well.
Hide this

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • identicon
    Scarper, 31 Oct 2006 @ 1:11pm

    The NYT points out that if you can patent tax strategies you could also patent a legal defense strategy. Clearly allowing patents on the way citizens can defend themselves against over-taxation or criminal allegations is ridiculous. Business method patents must be curtailed.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    agent888, 31 Oct 2006 @ 1:25pm

    patenting legal defenses

    note to self: patent the chewbacca defense strategy

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    new patent, 31 Oct 2006 @ 1:28pm

    new patent

    Is there a patent on the patent process? If not, it's mine!

    seriously.. glad to see mainstream news publications taking notice.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    trex, 31 Oct 2006 @ 1:58pm

    "Is there a patent on the patent process? If not, it's mine! "

    Refer to my recent patent application "A Methodological Process By Which Limited Monopolies for the Implementation of Invented Processes May Be Examined, Adjudicated, Granted and Protected."

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 31 Oct 2006 @ 2:17pm

    All the patent does, is allow the person (or usually corporation) holding it to reap the rewards for as long as its valid. That'd be fine and good and all if the person responsible for the invention got all the rewards. I say once a patent gets sold and becomes a piece of property for the public, what ever it concerns also then becomes the property of the entire public.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    misanthropic humanist, 31 Oct 2006 @ 3:49pm

    IP, progress, choose one.

    Patents are an unconscionable idea in a modern civilised society. I am in good company holding this belief along with Mr Einstein and Mr Jefferson, but it's proving hard to enlighten ordinary folk who have been so utterly brainwashed by the corporations.

    Anybody of moderate intelligence who makes a dispassionate and honest analysis of intellectual property will arrive at the conclusion that it impedes progress.

    Besides, there are no inventions, only discoveries. Nobody who believes in God or creationism can consistently assert the case for intellectual property. But mere logical impossibility has never stood in the way of these greedy retards before.

    So, as a freethinking athiest, or a religious conservative you must reject intellectual property as a concept. It is unique in being anti-capitalist, anti-socialist and spanning all creeds and religions as an abhorent notion.

    The only supporters of the idea are a disproportionately vocal minority who have a vested interest in keeping intellectual property, and those who do not understand it.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 31 Oct 2006 @ 7:35pm

    Well said misanthropic humanist!

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 1 Nov 2006 @ 4:09am

    Re: chewbacca defense strategy

    Patenting the chewbacca defense strategy DOES NOT MAKE SENCE!

    Why would a wookie living on Endor have anything patentable about it.

    Therfore the chewbacca defense strategy is non-obvious.

    Therfore the chewbacca defense strategy is Patentable.

    QED

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Close

Add A Reply

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Special Affiliate Offer

Essential Reading
Techdirt Insider Chat
Recent Stories

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it
Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.