海角大神

In , Objectivist Diana Hsieh admits IP is a 鈥渢horny鈥� issue. Progress! The citing Mossoff notes:

The Sewing Machine War was the first instance of what is today called a 鈥減atent thicket.鈥� The disputes prevented Singer from selling his invention, and tensions ran high in and out of court: When Howe personally called on Singer, Singer threatened to throw him down a flight of stairs.

But there鈥檚 a happy ending to the story, as your machine-stitched clothes evince. The Sewing Machine War ended with a just and lasting peace in 1856, when Orlando B. Potter鈥揳 lawyer representing one of the plaintiffs鈥搒uggested a solution that Mossoff calls 鈥済roundbreaking but also breathtakingly simple鈥�: The patent-holders would combine their patents in a 鈥減atent pool鈥� and share the profits from selling the machines. The patent pool participants lived happily and wealthily ever after鈥攐r at least until 1877, when the last patent expired.

The happy ending is that the holders of patent monopolies granted by the states pooled them to form a united front to quash competition. Thus larger companies erect barriers to entry, partially monopolizing a field, with the help of the monopolies granted by the state. Ironically, the state then turns around and uses its own antitrust law against them鈥揳s the article notes, 鈥渁nti-trust legislation today would likely render a smartphone patent pool an impossibility.鈥� (See my posts ; ; ; ;; .)

Quoting Mossoff, the article says:

the fact remains that lawsuits are often no more than an invitation to negotiation. 鈥淥ftentimes the way a party signals to another party in one鈥檚 industry, 鈥業鈥檓 serious about this鈥搚ou need to speak with me,鈥� is by filing a lawsuit,鈥� says Mossoff.

Ha! Extortion is an 鈥渋nvitation to negotiate.鈥� The euphemisms for statist aggression are many and varied鈥揷ollateral damage, and so on.

And most companies do reach amicable licensing agreements where they use one another鈥檚 technology for a fee.

Amicable! This means friendly. Yes. Very friendly to threaten to sue someone unless they pay you not to.

The article concludes:

So while the maze of patent lawsuits might seem like wasteful litigation, Mossoff cautions that the opposite might very well be true. Those who defend the patent system and intellectual property rights argue that it encourages innovation by ensuring that inventors get their due. 鈥淲hat the patent system is about is not what鈥檚 happening today or yesterday, but what鈥檚 going to happen tomorrow,鈥� says Mossoff.

This seems to recognize that IP creates injustice, but that those who favor it think it鈥檚 worth it in the long run, for the sake of higher goals. This is exactly the structure of the argument normal statists use to endorse conscription, taxation, and so on鈥搕hat the violations done to individuals are 鈥渨orth it鈥� for the greater good.

(For discussion of Hsieh and Mossoff see .)

.

------------------------------

海角大神 has assembled a diverse group of the best economy-related bloggers out there. Our guest bloggers are not employed or directed by the Monitor and the views expressed are the bloggers' own, as is responsibility for the content of their blogs. To contact us about a blogger, click here. To add or view a comment on a guest blog, please go to the blogger's own site by clicking on the link above.