From: Adam Back <adam@cypherspace.org> To: rysiek <rysiek@hackerspace.pl> Cc: cypherpunks@cpunks.org Sent: Monday, November 11, 2013 7:31 AM Subject: donate to a starving patent troll? nah, skip (Re: patents in a free society (Re: Brother can you help a fiber?))
I cant see any rational player voluntarily opting to honor a grossly abused ideas monopoly concept that only a force monopoly form of government could even pretend to enforce.
I think that a large part of the problem (even for libertarians such as myself) is that we have trouble imagining a non-statist solution to problems. We are so used to the idea of a government doing things (even if done badly, or things that shouldn't be done at all) that it's difficult to construct a replacement that is consistent with libertarian principles. I previously suggested that there could indeed be a voluntary-ist system to replace our existing patent system. Yes, an ideal kind of this system would have to be far more selective in 'granting' (e.g., "approving") patents. (perhaps only 20% of the current rate of granting would be allowed, possibly less.) There might even be competing such 'patent'-certification organizations. Stores might certify that they will buy only from companies that, themselves, certify that they do not violate any of the voluntary-ist patents. Marks on the goods will announce those certifications. Companies that manufacture such certified products might also certify that they will refuse to sell their products to stores that do not limit themselves to such certified products. Any consideration of this kind of system will have to deal with the existing, status-quo (government managed) patent and copyright system. Even if 80% of existing granted patents were improperly granted, that means that 20% are meritorious. Now, I suppose that there might be some people who simply don't believe in any form of ownership of patents and/or copyrights. But I suspect that most people would be willing to conform their buying to a voluntary system, IF frivolous patents are not granted, or they are subsequently 'un-granted' based on some sort of challenge mechanism. And, if large stores decide to limit their stock to such conforming products, it might be somewhat difficult to market goods that are not conforming. I realize that such arrangements may be hard for us to imagine. But soon enough, we might have little choice but to do that imagining. Jim Bell