Skip to main content

Writing 09: Intellectual Property


Intellectual Property has become increasing relevant as society has shifted from away from smaller more agrarian communities towards larger, more technologically driven urban communities. In the past farming techniques did not need to be as closely guarded as the markets were relatively small and the need for cooperation high. The markets today are global and the corporations much larger, leading to a need for intellectual property protection along with a declining need for cooperation. Patents exist within these large markets to allegedly safeguard innovation. The inventor is allowed to profit off a patent for twenty years, either by producing it himself or licensing others to do.
There is danger in protecting intellectual property this way. Under the current system a patent can be acquired without a product ever being manufactured, simply a broad idea is enough. This leads to patent trolling in which entities apply for a buy a large range of patents, many of which are not currently being made, in the hope that they can one day force other creators to pay a licensing fee to actually create the patented item. This does not safeguard innovation, but instead suppresses it. Inventors are disincentivized from finding ways to create patented ideas.
The failure of patent law invites suggestions for improvements. I believe that perhaps a patent should be required to show proof of being able to be produced rather than only the idea and that patents not actively in use might should lapse into the public domain faster than those being used. These changes might help lower the impact of patent trolls while still honoring the protective aspect of patents.
Another issue arising from the changing nature of the global economy is that of software and the rights of consumers. In the past if someone purchased a physical system, it was legal for that individual to take apart the machine and adapt it to their own needs. They could not reproduce it for sale without violating patent laws, but they could repair or adapt it to their own needs. The advent of software products has changed that aspect of ownership. It is now often illegal to take apart and adapt the software of certain products and services. Even the right of repair has slowly disappeared. Many modern laptops cannot be repaired at anything but a licensed repair shop, where prices are carefully controlled by the business.
Software fundamental differences to physical products have led to some interesting developments in how ideas can be shared. A variety of licenses now exist under which software can be shared for little or no cost. The software available through these licenses is often essential, building blocks upon which larger more proprietary systems can be created. Some of these licenses require that all code using it be shared under the same license while others simply require attribution. The widespread use of some of these essential software tools and their openness has led to problems vulnerability being exposed across a large number of systems, but has also led to quick detection and fixes for those vulnerabilities, such as HeartBleed and ShellShock.
Intellectual Property cannot be treated the same as physical systems, but the current system does have failings. The concept of ownership has changed drastically with the introduction of a technologically driven economy and will continue to shift as legislation slowly adapts to our new reality. The definition of innovation has changed, it is no longer a tinkerer or group of tinkerers working on a physical invention, but rather a community building software tools off the back of existing technologies, and intellectual property laws should change to reflect that new reality.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Writing 03: Diversity, Codes of Conduct

           The past week of class has been enlightening, and not always in a positive way. It is easy for us, as students of progressive institution lauded for bringing together the best and the brightest, to assume that we are not ensnared in the same traps as the rest of American society. We are. The discussion in the past week has been filled with the same heated, bipolar rhetoric that has become a hallmark of American media. Presented with a simple fact, that computer science falls well short of diversity benchmarks, we could not have a discussion that would bring people together, but rather farther alienated members of our community. Those who felt affected by the lack of diversity shared their experiences only to be questioned at length and trivialized. Those who saw little problem with the issue were met with contempt and apparent judgment. The inability to communicate effectively and understand that dissenting opinions can lead to communal understa...
Post a Comment
Read more

Writing 00

My decision making process is rooted in consequentialism. Growing up, my father would remind me constantly to think of the consequences of my actions, both good and bad. I am still fully learning that lesson, but strive to understand the potential impacts of my actions on myself and the word around me. This mindset bleeds into my understanding of talent. I see talent as human potential. It is something to be nurtured and strengthened. Talent is the ability of a person to affect the world around them using a particular ability or skill. The consequences of honing and developing a talent cannot be overstated, as talented individuals can change the world. The consequences of ignoring one’s talents are less immediately apparent. This is where the danger lies, the loss of human potential in underdeveloped talent is impossible to quantify and often easy to ignore.                Raw talent must be refined. For Compute...
Post a Comment
Read more

Writing 01: Identity

               I did not come to Computer Science early. I did not have a coding class in high school or start editing game code in my garage. In fact I avoided Computer Science as much as possible because it was something my brother did. Our relationship was often rocky in high school and I could not bear to start learning something he already knew so well; it would have been humiliating. Imagine my surprise when during my Intro to Engineering course I discovered that coding was something I enjoyed and was good at after all. This mindset originally caused me to stray away from the computing stereotypes I saw in my brother. I didn’t immediately switch to Linux and swear off Windows; I didn’t put all my time into passion projects. I let coding be a part of my school life, but kept it at a cautious distance.                This has changed. As muc...
Post a Comment
Read more