The system described takes a portion of the existing income tax. It would not effect the costs of a product at all. In fact it would lower the cost because there would not be any per item license fees.
Additionally, non-profits or individuals could use a patent for free.
Yes, you understand the basic concept. It eliminates licenses altogether.
The tax I suggested was directing a portion of the existing income tax towards royalty payments. As you pointed out it should be small enough to not be a burden but big enough to pile up. That is a detail that would need to be worked out.
And your idea of dissuading bogus patent applications is good. That is a problem under both the proposed system and the current system. Although it would not be as harmful under the new system since all ideas are free to use.
It definitely would address the problem caused by the pharmaceutical industry double dipping or even worse holding back inventions.
Actually the system I described in my article is nearly identical. It would be funded from the general income tax. My system eliminated the idea of licensing, the exact opposite of the headline here.
Please read my full article.
It is possible to accurately predict future innovations. This video briefly covers one part of using the Predictive Innovation Method to reveal what will be the next big thing.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ga-Km7nZMUg
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by Mark Proffitt.
Follow up to Abundance Based IP System
Based on the comments here I wrote a more detailed description of the way I envisioned such a system.
http://markproffitt.com/2010/04/20/details-of-abundance-based-intellectual-property-system/
Re: High license fee deters early adoption
The system described takes a portion of the existing income tax. It would not effect the costs of a product at all. In fact it would lower the cost because there would not be any per item license fees.
Additionally, non-profits or individuals could use a patent for free.
Re: Re: Re: Re: An incentive for public domain
Yes, you understand the basic concept. It eliminates licenses altogether.
The tax I suggested was directing a portion of the existing income tax towards royalty payments. As you pointed out it should be small enough to not be a burden but big enough to pile up. That is a detail that would need to be worked out.
And your idea of dissuading bogus patent applications is good. That is a problem under both the proposed system and the current system. Although it would not be as harmful under the new system since all ideas are free to use.
It definitely would address the problem caused by the pharmaceutical industry double dipping or even worse holding back inventions.
Re: Re: Royal Commission for Awards for Inventors
Actually the system I described in my article is nearly identical. It would be funded from the general income tax. My system eliminated the idea of licensing, the exact opposite of the headline here. Please read my full article.
How to Predict Future Innovations
It is possible to accurately predict future innovations. This video briefly covers one part of using the Predictive Innovation Method to reveal what will be the next big thing.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ga-Km7nZMUg