Barnacles

There’s an interesting thread on Marginal Revolution about software patents. In recent years “patent trolls” have become a parasitic industry all to themselves. Companies are created to acquire patents from the holders so they can then shake down whoever may be using them in their product. The patent troll buys a patent and then seeks out who may be using something like it. The user may not even know they are using a technology that is patented by another. Their choice is fight in court or pay up. It’s a form of green mail.

This form of business goes back a long time to when travelers would take over an inn or a private home and you had to pay them to leave. Imagine a town suddenly infested with appear to be gypsies and carny folk. The choice is to get a gang of men to drive them off or pay them to go infest the next town. Of course, just as gypsies target the weak and stupid, the patent trolls tend to pick on little guys lacking the means and sophistication to fight back. This from EFF is a good example.

The idea of a patent or license is to encourage and direct the behavior of the creative into practical things. Instead of offering a prize, the inventor is granted exclusive rights to his invention for a fixed period of time. The world gets the invention and the inventor gets money, maybe lots of money. Otherwise, the smart and creative would have every reason to conceal their cleverness. The farmer with a better plow would not sell his idea, as that would work against his interests. Patents, in theory, increase human knowledge.

The assertion that patents are necessary to spur invention is a new idea. In fact, the idea of patents for intellectual property came under heavy assault in the 19th century.  That was an age of industrial growth and an explosion of innovation. For most of the last 500 years, starting from the advent of the patent system in Venice, patents were limited and temporary. There was an understanding that no idea remains hidden forever. If the first discoverer did not publish it, others would discover it in time and publish it.

What we see today with patent trolls is how the law is easily turned into a weapon by the parasite class. In a prior age, the landlord had to actually own real property, before he could extract rents. Today, you get rich by finding a way to freeload off the system in some way. The better you are at it, the richer you get. Perhaps you get so rich you can buy land and rent it out. The modern economy, thanks to technology and complex financial instruments, is highwaymen shaking down everyone in the normal economy.

The current morass is just another example of why schemes to correct some aspect of the human condition always fail. There’s a fraction of every human society that seeks out ways to live on the labor of others. It is their one skill and their sole focus. Some become salesman or lawyers. Others go into banditry or illicit trades. They are always with us. Try to protect the rights of the honest with patent laws, for example and the parasites will find a way to use that as way to lever money from the honest. Since they are really good at being parasites, they can never be out foxed by new laws. They always win in the end.

One thought on “Barnacles

  1. If this comment makes it, it is proof that the author believes in what they state: the free flow of information is better than the desired to control it. If not, it is proof that the author essentially believes IP has a useful role, and ownership of information is good. Either way I win. You might say it’s a “win-win” situation.

    Z December 16, 2013 at 1:20 pm
    The current system is closer to the complex property arrangements seen in Europe during medival period. Whatever the intended purpose, they have become a tool of the well connected to wall off the wealth of society for themselves.

    Reply

    Ray Lopez December 16, 2013 at 4:50 pm
    hey Z, reminds me I must visit your blog and ‘share my deep thoughts’.

    “complex property arrangements seen in Europe during medival [sic] period”- you mean like Fee Simple Absolute, Life Estate, Tenants in Common, Tenants in the Entirety? Those complex property arrangements? Seem to have worked quite well up until now. The 21st century dinged these complex rights a bit tho (“Kelo v. City of New London, 545 U.S. 469 (2005) was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States involving the use of eminent domain to transfer {property from Peter the honest taxpayer to Paul the crooked developer}”)

    – See more at: http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2013/12/software-patents.html#comment-157977538

Comments are closed.