It is not surprising that the editorial in question (via the P2P Foundation) comes from the authors of “Against Intellectual Monopoly“, Boldrin and Levine.
The proposal may be radical, but the rhetoric is not. What the authors are suggesting is that if you consider patents purely from a utilitarian perspective, they do not achieve the end of spurring innovation. This is consistent with the problems that Heller lays out in his recent book, “The Gridlock Economy“. Both Boldrin and Heller have done interviews on the Econtalk podcast and I recommend listening to both episodes.
Share
Related posts
- Microsoft Co-Founder Fires a Patent Broadside (0)
- feeds | grep links > RIAA Says DMCA Not Working (Hard Enough for Them), Jury Invalidates EFF’s Top Patent, Proposed Apple Spyware Goes Too Far, and More (0)
- feeds | grep links > Chrome Store Opens to Developers, Flash in Java, P2P Users as Innocent Infringers, and More (0)
- feeds | grep links > Mobile Cloud, Name Changes and Reputation, Joke Patents at Sun, and More (0)
- feeds | grep links > Still More on P and NP, Google Responds to Oracle’s Java Suit, Touch is Coming to Ubuntu, and More (0)
Posted in General.
Tagged with patent.
By Thomas Gideon
– December 21, 2009
0 Responses
Stay in touch with the conversation, subscribe to the RSS feed for comments on this post.