• echo64@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Remember when Amazon, Apple, ARM, Cisco, Facebook, Google, Huawei, Intel, Microsoft, Mozilla, Netflix, Nvidia, Samsung Electronics and Tencent all had to come together and form a super group to develop a royalty free video codec because something as simple as compressing and decompressing video was so god damn patent encumbered by people who just existed to suck money out of everyone.

    Literally, every time software is patented, it ends up being used to screw with everyone, then eventually the patent expires ten years after the software was useful, or we have to waste huge amounts of effort to sideline it.

    You sound like you need a history refresher on patents in the software industry and the disastrous effect that it has had in hurting innovation and consumers and how it is dominated by trolls and squatters.

    • BaroqueInMind@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      25
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I don’t know how to convey to you how important it is to incentivize innovation without worrying someone else will simply steal your ideas to make millions from your hard work you did inventing something while they literally did nothing.

      If I make something and someone else can simply take it and dominate the market with it and pay me nothing for the work i did, why the fuck should I even bother making anything?

      • echo64@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Again, look at the history of software patents. Tell me a single time it incentivied innovation and wasn’t just used by patent trolls and wasn’t just a huge waste of time and money for the industry to spend time on.

        I think you are wholey unfamiliar with software patents in general and are just going on some basic guiding principal and I can tell you right now, history has not played out in your idilic description at all and you are just coming off as ignorant on the topic.

        • BaroqueInMind@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          15
          ·
          1 year ago

          Let’s take a look at countries with no patent laws and compare their innovations that contributed to the rest of the world:

          East Timor - nothing
          Suriname - nothing
          Somalia - nothing
          Eritrea - nothing
          Maldives - nothing
          Marshall Islands - nothing
          Micronesia - nothing
          Myanmar - nothing
          Palau - nothing
          South Sudan - nothing
          North Korea - nothing
          
          
          • Richard@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            This is literally just whataboutism. You must be degenerate if you think that there’s a correlation between the research performance of the listed countries and their patent laws. There are dozens of more useful and much more relevant indicators for why these nations are disadvantaged in this regard. But just stick to your belief that North Korea is what it is because it doesn’t have patent laws lol.

            Also, for you to better understand the harm that software patents caused and are causing, consider reading Free Software, Free Society by Richard Stallman.

            • Mchugho@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              There is literally a 1:1 correlation between protecting IP and R&D and innovation. Start ups that patent their ideas are genuinely more successful. You’re naive if you think IP only helps protect large companies.

            • BaroqueInMind@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              My mistake, you’re right. We should completely remove the incentive to innovate novel ideas and no longer protect them if they are created to allow theft.

              I am a hypocrite thief that uses free software in my daily life.

              • Mchugho@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                Not worth it mate. People will find all kinds of post hoc ways to justify the fact that they want to use the tech that others have developed for free.

      • SuddenlyBlowGreen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t know how to convey to you how important it is to incentivize innovation without worrying someone else will simply steal your ideas to make millions from your hard work you did inventing something while they literally did nothing.

        If I make something and someone else can simply take it and dominate the market with it and pay me nothing for the work i did, why the fuck should I even bother making anything?

        TIL that open source doesn’t exist.

        • BaroqueInMind@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          TIL that morons here don’t know the difference between software patents and copyright licenses.

          • SuddenlyBlowGreen@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Oh sorry, I was under the impression that you had at least a basic knowledge about software and software development.

            I now see that that’s not the case.

            Open source is an area where software patents don’t generally protect the product, and yet it’s the most innovative space out there. And in cases where patents are brought in (see the rust trademark incident) they are rejected by the community. And yet open source is still around, and powering most of the internet and present in most devices.

            If what you said about patents were the case, that would not be so.