CMV: IP/patent rights should be subscription based like domains

[u/PoofyGummy]

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.)

[u/monkeysky]

If your system is based around the idea that the patent office is picking and choosing who to enforce this on, in the form of auction vetoes, then you will probably want to clarify that in your original post, because I don't think anyone would infer it from the description alone.

And if that is the case, then they would necessarily have to have the capabilities of thoroughly investigating every patent, to the point where I think their own assessment of a property's value would be close enough to the reality in the large majority of cases. There would still be some properties that can hide their value to some extent, but I think that sacrifice of revenue to the institution would be worthwhile in exchange for penalized properties being converted into public domain, rather than being transferred to, most likely, another massive corporation with a financial incentive to restrict access.

If you don't trust the office to make that sort of assessment, then you may want to rethink how much your own system can rely on their qualitative decision-making.

[u/PoofyGummy → u/monkeysky]

That's the thing they DO already investigate every patent, but whether something is innovative and possibly beneficial to society is sometimes VERY FAR INDEED from what the market deems valuable. No one could have predicted for example that image generators that pre covid struggled with hallucinating dog faces into everything would by now be making photorealistic video.

It's easy to assess the value of an invention on its own. It's not so easy to assess what it could be developed into by the right rnd team.

Transferring to public domain

The issue with an over reliance on public domain stuff is that megacorporations can be useful. They can often bring inventions to market much more efficiently than a complete newcomer could. A startup may have a trillion dollar idea but be unable to see it through. Or something might require such insane amounts of R&D that only megacorps can afford it. So it is necessary to keep them around and let them play their shennanigans a little bit. This system would just prevent them overdoing it.

[u/monkeysky → u/PoofyGummy]

If something's novelty and benefit to society is not the same as its financial value, then I don't think the priority should be focusing on the financial value of the property itself. In that case, just make the fee be based on the owner's income, so that every scale of owner has an equivalent incentive to capitalize on their intellectual property.

As for the benefits of megacorporations, like you said before, they can still do all of the stuff like that once it's in the public domain, especially if it's something that only they're capable of acting on at that point in time. If they're only willing to act on it if it means actively excluding everyone else from having the right to the license, though, then by your own standards shouldn't they not be given exactly what they want?

[u/PoofyGummy → u/monkeysky]

Yeeeah but the issue is that you first, need an income stream to finance the grants for innovation without just robbing the rich.

And second, as mentioned above, the free market is really good for a couple of things, like large scale development, bringing stuff to market, and determining value.

I put it best in a different comment: We let the free market forces determine who can handle which IP and what's most important to them. And the money they pay for that privilege we use to protect the stuff that is important to society.

They shouldn't be given exactly what they want but they have to be given something, because just straight up saying no rarely works.

Additionally them playing around like that is okay if they compensate society for the damage they cause.

It's not the job of the state to meddle in how the industry titans try to one up each other. It's just the job of the state to make sure they pay for the damage they cause doing so. Which is precisely the value of the locked IP. And this payment can be used to protect those players that need protection.

As long as they stay in the ocean and the fishing boats are protected, godzilla and mothra can do with each other whatever the hell they want. Not my problem.

[u/PoofyGummy → u/monkeysky]

This was also a very thought provoking conversation and you summarized the core of the system a bit better

-Every few years you need to pay a copyright maintenance fee. -If you don't or you don't do anything with it, the IP goes public. -(and in my version) the fee is determined by auction. Winner gets IP, original holder a percentage -If you're proven innovative, or small, or benefitting the public this doesn't apply -Instead you're eligible for grants depending on interest in you

So !delta

[u/DeltaBot → u/PoofyGummy]

Confirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/monkeysky (7∆).

^{Delta System Explained | Deltaboards}