posted by
n1
on Thursday August 07 2014, @11:16AM
from the gather-round-and-hear-this-tale-of-woe dept.
from the gather-round-and-hear-this-tale-of-woe dept.
I plan to give a short talk on the patent system and patent trolls at my local Toastmasters group. The idea is to educate folks about the abuses to the patent system, who it impacts and why the system is vulnerable to such abuses. Preferring not to present a problem without suggesting some way to help, I have donated to Adam Carolla's fund, but that will not be appropriate for everyone.
What other suggestions can I make for the average person to help make a difference? After all, it is the average person who covers the cost and loses out when innovation is stifled.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Ask Soylent: What Can the Average Person Do to Support Patent Reform?
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 29 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(Score: 1) by Erde on Thursday August 07 2014, @12:30PM
eof
(Score: 5, Insightful) by nitehawk214 on Thursday August 07 2014, @01:30PM
How does that work when neither party is for patent or copyright reform?
"Don't you ever miss the days when you used to be nostalgic?" -Loiosh
(Score: 0) by Erde on Thursday August 07 2014, @05:01PM
Are you implying that the US has only two parties? I know what you are really insinuating here, but that doesn't mean its any less silly.
(Score: 2) by e_armadillo on Friday August 08 2014, @05:26PM
Agreed, *but* that only works for the average person when there are measures and/or candidates to vote for. If there are no measures on the ballots, then its a matter of finding out where the candidates stand with respect to this issue and then vote accordingly. But, as hinted by the other reply, this doesn't work if none of the candidates have a published stand on this. The folks I talk to may see the point and see the need for reform. But when compared to other issues that affect their lives, this isn't going to be something that will instantly turn them into zealots ready to grill every politician to nail them down on their stand on this issue -- using their vote as leverage.
That said, I think I will note that participating in the political process is one way that they can help.
"How are we gonna get out of here?" ... "We'll dig our way out!" ... "No, no, dig UP stupid!"
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Sir Garlon on Thursday August 07 2014, @12:37PM
Ultimately, the solution to patents has to come from the legislature. There are three ways I know of to get the legislature to advance an agenda. First and crudest is your vote: support candidates who are in favor of your cause and oppose those who are not. Second is writing to your current representatives directly. This is more powerful in some ways because fewer people write to their representatives than vote. Third is lobbying. Groups, such as the EFF, who advocate patent reform can be more influential than individuals. Those groups love to accept money, or one can support them in other ways such as by writing letters or even knocking on doors.
I left out political contributions because I do not think we can defeat the patent industry by outspending it. I'll just point out that the whole purpose of campaign money is to buy advertising to get out the vote. Votes, not money, are the real prize politicians covet. You can counterbalance the campaign money to some extent through activism.
[Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
(Score: 2) by RobotMonster on Thursday August 07 2014, @02:16PM
Ahahahah. hehahahehe! Ahem, sorry. Hahahehehe! Ahahahah.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 07 2014, @07:42PM
Cantor raised almost $5.5M in that election cycle.
Incumbent Eric Cantor Spent $168,637 on Steak Houses; Challenger David Brat Spent $122,793 on His Entire Campaign [townhall.com]
Remind me again: Who won that one?
-- gewg_
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Nerdfest on Thursday August 07 2014, @03:53PM
You can also not buy products from companies that abuse patents, as well as telling everyone you know not to as well, and explaining why. At worst, it may push these companies towards not abusing patents, and it may also even push them to help lobby for patent reform.
The best part of this approach is that it punishes the companies that are responsible for some of the problems. Unfortunately it doesn't really work against the pure patent trolls, only against companies like Apple and Microsoft that have been using them to try to stop competition.
(Score: 2) by SlimmPickens on Friday August 08 2014, @01:03AM
I actually think attempting to seed the right type of discussion in the media is the key. Obviously we all have different means available to do that.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Silentknyght on Thursday August 07 2014, @12:52PM
The best thing the members of your audience can do is to listen critically to your speech, be aware of the issues in the existing system, and then parrot your actions. In other words, be informed then inform others; spread knowledge, and change the culture. Once the existing system is culturally unacceptable, then meaningful change will occur organically.
Else, yeah, like other said: donate money to organizations like the EFF in the hope of swifter action.
(Score: 1) by jbWolf on Friday August 08 2014, @05:20AM
This. We need to spread the word and get others to spread the word.
I also already went to work on the next step: It needs to be reformed, but into what? We need to have a good, clear definition ready when the tide changes. I haven't found any definition that I was happy with so I wrote my own. I call it the "Ten Year Idea [jb-wolf.com]". There's a lot more to it than just saying "ten years". Even if it is never adopted into mainstream, it is there to provoke intelligen discussion and intelligent thought.
www.jb-wolf.com [jb-wolf.com]
(Score: 2) by migz on Thursday August 07 2014, @01:44PM
Rosa Parks. Just sayin...
(Score: 2) by Blackmoore on Thursday August 07 2014, @02:57PM
So what you propose is to park our ass on a patent, and refuse to move when asked by a big corporation?
interesting. I suppose I'll get my monkeys to start typing up every possible invention never thought of.
(Score: 2) by migz on Thursday August 07 2014, @03:43PM
You only need one very public outcry to get public sentiment on the right side. Eventually the authorities will be embarrassed into action. You don't need to invent a patent, just find a little guy being stamped on by a big corporate. (Ideally a good-too-shoes slightly older african american woman...;-P
(Score: 3, Insightful) by rts008 on Thursday August 07 2014, @01:56PM
Kill all lawyers?
Is this a trick question?
(Score: 2) by tathra on Thursday August 07 2014, @05:11PM
thats a shakespearian solution. a 'bender solution' would be "forget the patent system, i'll make my own! with blackjack, and hookers!", or "kill all humans".
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Thursday August 07 2014, @03:01PM
My suggestion: write software based on patents and release them in source code only. This way:
a. anyone with enough skill can use it
b. free speech should trump patents (and, after all, the source code is just another re-wording of the patent text and the text of the patent is not protected)
If more of us would do it, it should put a strain at least on the concept of software patents.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by Tork on Thursday August 07 2014, @03:25PM
The first step would be to actually understand how patents work in the first place. For example: If Apple patents a working holographic projector, Star Trek the Next Generation is *not* prior-art. Nobody's going to take patent reform suggestions seriously when the majority that demand it spew crap like this.
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: 2) by Nerdfest on Thursday August 07 2014, @03:47PM
You mean if Apple *implements* a holographic projector. Much of the current problem is that people are patenting ideas without any implementation, in which case Star Trek most definitely should be prior art.
(Score: 2) by Tork on Thursday August 07 2014, @04:35PM
Um, no, even in the case you've laid out, this is not nor should it ever be true. They don't build holographic projectors on Star Trek. They don't even simulate them. They plop them into an episode to serve whatever story they're trying to tell. There is no design other than "will the audience buy it for the four seconds its on screen?"
Sorry, Star Trek is still not prior art.
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 07 2014, @06:29PM
For patents like "rounded corners" it sure as hell can be.
(Score: 2) by Tork on Thursday August 07 2014, @06:42PM
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: 1) by ghost on Thursday August 07 2014, @03:44PM
(Score: 2) by kaszz on Thursday August 07 2014, @05:40PM
Make (ab)use if the patent system and abuse it heavily until it looses system stability and comes undone. Same could be done with (C) stuff..
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 07 2014, @08:24PM
A significant portion of the miserable state of affairs can be traced to 1 dirtbag. [google.com]
As of May 2014, that particular problem is gone.
Chief Judge Randall Rader Resigns in Disgrace (from the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit) [patenthawk.com]
Courts are striking down stupid patents left and right these days.
-- gewg_
(Score: 3, Interesting) by bzipitidoo on Thursday August 07 2014, @11:08PM
Some years ago, I saw that an expert witness in an intellectual property case was using the credentials of a major university to make himself seem more impressive. He styled himself as something like Professor Smith of Big State U. Court documents listed him as affiliated with the university.
I looked into it. I couldn't believe a big university would want to take sides on a court case they weren't involved in. I inquired of the university's provost whether they knew of this activity of their star professor. They did not know about it. And, after I brought it to their attention, I could see they didn't like it. The provost advised me not to reveal my name to him or anyone else at the university, and certainly not that professor, just in case. Bit chilling to think I could make myself the object of a vendetta. Tattletales and whistleblowers have a rough life. I don't know what they did, probably muzzled him tightly. I have not heard a peep out of him about any court cases since.
Wish I'd inquired sooner. Could've shut this arrogant jerk down before he assisted in hurting more victims of bullshit intellectual property claims.
(Score: 1) by hellcat on Friday August 08 2014, @11:46AM
Hi Armadillo,
I've been part of the patent process - as a customer - for over 20 years. I have 6, and we've just started the process for another to be filed in a few days.
Understand that the patent process was uniquely American to start, just as much an experiment as democracy. Not that it was invented here, but that patents were awarded by representatives of the people instead of the crown.
We have an almost distinct governmental, legal, and judicial system set up just for patents. All change has to percolate through all these sectors.
Recently, our system has adopted standards that enable us to synchronize with the rest of the world - the most important part of which is called "first to file."
Finally, it's important to appreciate that the patent system is designed to unleash the creativity of the individual, giving them the right to protect their ideas in return for sharing their knowledge. As such, the system must be slow to change. Today's business environment, coupled with the rapid rate of our increase in knowledge, are allowing unscrupulous organizations to flood the system to their advantage. In this sense, then, there is nothing wrong with the patent system itself. The root cause of our problem is unbridled and unfettered greed.
And that is a problem we have been working to solve for a very, very, long, time.
Steve
(Score: 2) by Open4D on Friday August 08 2014, @03:04PM
The EFF - https://supporters.eff.org/donate [eff.org] - EFF is mainly focussed on the USA I think, but non-Americans may still consider them a sensible choice
The FFII - http://ffii.org/National%20chapters [ffii.org] - consists of various national organizations
The FSF - http://www.fsf.org/about/ [fsf.org] - which "also has sister organizations in France, Latin America, Europe and India".
And all 3 groups also welcome donations of time instead of money.
(Score: 2) by e_armadillo on Friday August 08 2014, @05:31PM
Thank you. This certainly helps.
"How are we gonna get out of here?" ... "We'll dig our way out!" ... "No, no, dig UP stupid!"