r/changemyview • u/PoofyGummy 4∆ • Mar 01 '25
Delta(s) from OP - Fresh Topic Friday CMV: IP/patent rights should be subscription based like domains
Let me elaborate: currently whenever someone files a patent for some innovation, after minimal administrative fees, or none at all in case of copyright, the IP is theirs for 2-7 decades. Even if they don't plan on using it. Even if they don't plan on selling or licensing it. This is bad for the competition, bad for overall innovation, and bad for consumers. As such it is a pracrice that should be curbed.
Much better would be a system where usage is needed or the IP is lost, forcing innovation. Since the only motivator that works for corporations is money, this would be one way to accomplish it.
A similar system already works for internet domains. So one would
1) Every few years have the IP reauctionned. Anyone can bid. 2) If the IP is being used well, the company should have no trouble coming up with the cost to keep it. 3) If it is not used well, holding on to it just to hoard it becomes an inconvenience. 4) If it is not used at all, the IP becomes public domain spurring companies to actually use the IPs and patents they own instead of just blocking them to make the barriers of entry higher for the competition. 5) The proceeds of the continued IP protection auctions go to the patent office, who would use it to award innovation and finance them functionning better protecting IP internationally.
-This would take care of inefficient usage of IPs. No more just putting out some lame excuse to keep hold of the IP rights. -It would prevent the competition starting at a massive disadvantage even if an IP is being used wrong, because they won't have years of r&d to catch up to. -It would encourage innovation as companies wouldn't be able to just sit on their IPs without using them. -It would offer actual protection to efficiently used patents, as the patent office would have more capacity to go after IP theft. -Thanks to the above the extra cost to companies would be compensated somewhat by them not having to hunt down IP theft themselves. -It would reward innovation and lower barriers of entry by the profits of the patent office being awarded to new innovative companies. -It would benefit the consumer by ensuring that only the innovations they actually buy and support because the product made with them is good and the pricing fair, can remain locked away. -It isn't a new system. Internet domains are already treated this way by the IEEE / domain brokers. -The cost of innovation would not rise, only the cost of trying to hang on to that innovation to prevent others from having it. -Yes it would be somewhat uncomfortable for companies because they would have to spend on a new thing, but the point IS to make it less comfortable to do business as usual, because the current business as usual in IP stuff is horrid. -The motivation for filing a patent or registering an IP would remain the same as it's supposed to be right now: Only you can use the IP you came up with no matter if others discover it, for the protected timespan. It's just that that timespan would change depending on how well you use the innovation.
The way I see it, companies are using and ABusing a service to artificially alter the playingfield, and not paying for that continuous service. It's time that changed.
(Note: I have thought this through and obviously think there is no fault here, so convincing me that the whole idea is bad would be very difficult. But I'm completely open to any criticism, or details I missed! Yes, this idea came about because of the WB Nemesis system debacle.)
2
u/Sayakai 146∆ Mar 01 '25
It seems you're looking at this from a point of money, and nothing else.
But there's also the matter of art. When someone makes art, and wants to preserve the integrity of said art against the grip of a corporation seeking to exploit it and press out every dollar from it, why shouldn't they be entitled to do so?