this post was submitted on 24 Jun 2023
205 points (100.0% liked)

Chat

7507 readers
28 users here now

Relaxed section for discussion and debate that doesn't fit anywhere else. Whether it's advice, how your week is going, a link that's at the back of your mind, or something like that, it can likely go here.


Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

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

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years 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.