On Thu, 11 Jun 2009 17:21:32 -0300, you wrote:

>This is again one of those suggestions that seem to make sense but on
>closer examination don't. How can you determine the cost of an
>invention? See also my other message for an example. How do you factor
>in the knowledge necessary to get there? If Russell invents a novel
>low-power voltage converter, it isn't just the few hours he needed from
>the idea to the first realization, it's the years, maybe decades of work
>and study that got him there. How to factor this in? 

It isn't a factor unless without the existing patent system Russell would
not have worked. 

>Besides, this is using the patent backwards. The patent system is meant
>to make ideas better sellable in a market economy. 

Not at all. The patent system was introduced as a reward for teaching. I
know how to do something, in exchange for teaching everyone else  how to do
it (by publishing a patent which contains the required knowledge) I get
rewarded. It had nothing to do with markets or economies it was devised to
encourage the seeking and sharing of knowledge for the benefit of all
mankind. It is an important point often lost that the patent system and
copyright were devised for the benefit of mankind not the benefit of
inventors and artists. 

It is a sign of how perverted the nature of the reward and system has
become that you think it something to do with markets and economies. 

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist