Patry has said the point of his book was to change the way we talk about patents and copyrights. This book does that, and should be required reading for anyone who wants to start up a business. Note that I put it in my lineup of books to the left.
His summary is a warning to lawyers to knock off the abuse. The last couple of chapters get into specific problems and contradictions with what we have now, especially the Rothbardian argument against copyright holders violating the real property rights of others.
As I read others and experts on "IPR" I see they all miss the practical business reason one should never engage in copyrights or patents or trademarks. There is a better way, and once your mind is corrupted by the logic of "IPR" you cannot see the opportunity.
Apple computer attracts artists to their sales system because of the delivery system Apple devised serve the customers. If there was no such thing as copyrights and patents, what Apple devised would still exist. The artists would still flock to Apple, and Apple would still pay in order to incite artists to flock, thus creating the ever upward spiral Apple created.
Jobs at Apple, like me and every other independent actor, recognizes there is a copyright regime, and builds value in spite of that regime. People who believe Apple is built on copyright contracts are delusional. To build a business in which "IPR" plays a role is to pretty much guarantee failure, a fact born out by the fact 8 million failed attempts at business recorded by the USA patent examiners since 1789. The fact that there is a wide swathe of people who fall for the error of survivorship bias reflects on them, not on those of us who eschew "IPR" as well as copyrights and patents.
Patry is arguing it is thinking of copyrights and patents as "intellectual" "property" "rights" is what ails our country (and he is another patent attorney who says our country is over unless we end the system as it is now.) As probably the highest ranked copyright and patent attorney in USA, he ought to be heard by one and all.
I've outlined a few problems with this book, which are in any event irrelevant to Patry's argument. My other favorite book on "IPR" "Against Intellectual Property" is also listed there, and I criticized its exception for trademarks. I still hold trademarks are a bad idea.
Example 187,987,974:
What a waste of time in USA.
Feel free to forward this by email to three of your friends.
His summary is a warning to lawyers to knock off the abuse. The last couple of chapters get into specific problems and contradictions with what we have now, especially the Rothbardian argument against copyright holders violating the real property rights of others.
As I read others and experts on "IPR" I see they all miss the practical business reason one should never engage in copyrights or patents or trademarks. There is a better way, and once your mind is corrupted by the logic of "IPR" you cannot see the opportunity.
Apple computer attracts artists to their sales system because of the delivery system Apple devised serve the customers. If there was no such thing as copyrights and patents, what Apple devised would still exist. The artists would still flock to Apple, and Apple would still pay in order to incite artists to flock, thus creating the ever upward spiral Apple created.
Jobs at Apple, like me and every other independent actor, recognizes there is a copyright regime, and builds value in spite of that regime. People who believe Apple is built on copyright contracts are delusional. To build a business in which "IPR" plays a role is to pretty much guarantee failure, a fact born out by the fact 8 million failed attempts at business recorded by the USA patent examiners since 1789. The fact that there is a wide swathe of people who fall for the error of survivorship bias reflects on them, not on those of us who eschew "IPR" as well as copyrights and patents.
Patry is arguing it is thinking of copyrights and patents as "intellectual" "property" "rights" is what ails our country (and he is another patent attorney who says our country is over unless we end the system as it is now.) As probably the highest ranked copyright and patent attorney in USA, he ought to be heard by one and all.
I've outlined a few problems with this book, which are in any event irrelevant to Patry's argument. My other favorite book on "IPR" "Against Intellectual Property" is also listed there, and I criticized its exception for trademarks. I still hold trademarks are a bad idea.
Example 187,987,974:
Oprah Winfrey will have to defend in court her use of the phrase "Own Your Power" in her magazine and on her website, a U.S. appeals court said on Friday.
Overturning a lower court ruling, the 2nd Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals revived claims brought by Simone Kelly-Brown, owner of a motivational services business, Own Your Power Communications Inc, who says she owns a trademark on the phrase.
What a waste of time in USA.
Feel free to forward this by email to three of your friends.
0 comments:
Post a Comment