Best among equals
p2pnet.net News View:- In 2001 the Australian government introduced the Innovation Patent to protect lower level inventions which wouldn’t normally meet the requirements of a Standard Patent.
This was a fantastic concept for fueling innovation for one simple reason:
The test of an Innovation Patent is that it must show a “substantial contribution to the working of the invention”, even if the contribution is an obvious one that could be made by anybody who’s skilled in that particular area.
Basically, this means an Innovation Patent holder can say, “Yeah, anybody could have done it, but I was the one who actually did“. But because fewer resources are required to make something worthy of a Innovation Patent, the patent holder only gets eight years to exploit their invention instead of the normal 20 years.
As we still live in a “closed” intellectual property based world, this is a great step in giving entrepreneurs and inventors a reason to keep doing their thing. They can take the inventive process one step at a time. By shortening the length of the patent, there’s actually a bigger incentive to keep working on the invention and this will be especially beneficial to developers of complicated works such as stem cell based medicines where there may be 40 years worth of work involved before a product is ready for market.
The idea of shorter periods for people to exploit their inventions has actually been coming along quite nicely for more than a decade in “open” intellectual property circles, and it’s proving to be damned effective.
In the “open” world the challenges are bigger, yet they’re met more often. Developers are constantly helping their competitors, and yet they can still be market leaders. A bright newcomer can destroy the major players with one new concept, while the defeated stalwart can claw its way back to the top just as fast.
Take the eDonkey network.
When MetaMachine released the first version of eDonkey 2000, it was a stunning piece of software and was steadily improved upon. The idea was quickly borrowed and the eMule Project came into being soon after. Being open source, eMule developed at a faster rate and development continued at a frantic pace until it became the dominant client on the eDonkey network.
MetaMachine responded with Overnet, a decentralized version of their network. Again, the concept was borrowed and the word “Kademlia” started working it’s way into the online vocabulary. The Kademlia Distributed Hash Table network was jumped on my eMule users and coders alike and not long after it was declared to be “fairly stable,” the developers of the popular Azureus BitTorrent client announced they’d worked a Kad-based searching method into their client. Then the official BitTorrent client was quick to announce the implementation of a similar system. Not long after that, poor old MetaMachine announced they had worked out how a user could group a bunch of files together.
In the world of “open” intellectual property, a developer doesn’t have to hide his or her work from competitors. “Protection” comes from simply being the best among equals.
Some say that war is the greatest stimulant for innovation, but this can’t be true. The US military had more than 30 years to develop the DARPA network, a period during which a bitter Cold War was waged and threats against America multiplied dramatically. The end result was a communications tool that could only be operated by highly trained and exceptionally skilled technicians.
Enter the CERN academic who wanted a convenient way to organize his research notes, and HTML was born. Ten years later we can communicate with anyone, anywhere. And thankfully, even the traditional “closed” intellectual property system is working its way towards a more open working environment.
Where fast moving development is the key to success, an Innovation Patent is an excellent option. However, in the place where ideas really take on a life of their own – the internet – open development will always be better both for innovators and for everyone else.
Alex H, p2pnet – Sydney, Australia
[Alex is an operations manager for an ATM (automatic teller machine) supplier and he specialises in infrastructure development and maintenance, and logistics. He’s also an[other] active member of the Shareaza community.]
=================
Something you think we should know? tips[at]p2pnet.net
August 9th, 2005 at 9:33 pm
I applaud the idea that patents can have a lower status and be rewarded a lower protection value because of that status. It does create a sort of incentive to continue to create. Unlike the present terms of copyright and patent.
However there is a future danger here, just like the copyright and patent. In the US the copyright terms were for 14 years plus an additional 14 years. They are all but indefinate now. Nothing you hear in your lifetime, that is pertinate to you, will ever become public domain during your lifetime. The danger is the extension of terms, just like what the copyright has turned into.
Has anyone noticed lately that there aren’t many new bands coming out? Certainly not like in the 60’s and 70’s. When I say coming out, it isn’t that there is any less interest in folks wanting to play; there is far less interest in developing a band into a national seller. The cartels used to do that. In favor of saving a buck, they don’t anymore.
They want someone else to pick up the tab for development and IF that band turns into a commercial success, then they’ll talk. So what would some small producer of a band that does it the hard way get out of all the work it takes to develop an artist? When the artist reaches his hot status, then the cartels want to steal the artist. Sort of like what they would accuse others of doing. Of course we know they are all above this sort of behavior, don’t we? *snickers*
For that matter, there is nothing that prevents a copyright holder of purposely trashing the work just before it becomes public domain. No penality of any sort. When was the last time you saw something actually reach public domain? Name it. The drift here is this. This generation won’t be seeing anything become public domain as the laws changed to protect the mouse. If affected every other copyright in the process. We won’t live long enough to see the mouse freed (or any other work for that matter). It isn’t in the interests of the holders that any work ever become public domain. Why store what isn’t paying? They don’t. At some point the shelves are cleaned in the storage vault for those items more commercially profitable. Try finding some of the rare stuff that came out in the 60’s. Only way you will find it is if you are on a p2p. P2p has acted as the respository for music no longer available, no matter the money you might be willing to spend on it. Simply, you can’t order, you can’t buy, but you can get for free. No wizardy required here to figure out its value.
August 10th, 2005 at 1:58 pm
If the cartels cannot make money via innovation and imagination, they will do it by extortion. This so-called limited patent is just another attempt by the cartels to sink their legal clout into the realm of small innovations. If copyright and patents actually stimulated innovation, why has there been nothing but crap coming out of Hollyw00d?
Although the soap opera, “Welcome to the Scene” lacks special effects and mostly shows computer desktops, the plot is much more imaginative than most of the movies put out by Hollyw00d. Independent video is coming along quite nicely. Soon, I believe, the quality of independent video that is free for download will surpass what Hollyw00d produces. When that day comes, I believe people will stop bothering to download their crap. What leg will the cartels stand on then if no one is downloading their stuff? They will have no basis to sue.