Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Showing Original Post only (View all)

eniwetok

(1,629 posts)
Tue Sep 20, 2016, 12:39 PM Sep 2016

Unconstitutional Abuse Of Patent System? [View all]

Business benefits from numerous freebies provided by government which greatly enhance the wealth and power of corporations and their owners... freebies such intellectual property monopolies... patents, copyrights and trademarks. (Doesn't Trump claim his "brand" is worth 3 billion?). Then there's free limited liability protections for corporations which arguably should be purchased as insurance from the private sector. This protects the private wealth in the case of corporate bankruptcies... even if it shafts legitimate creditors.

Of these four only two appear in the Constitution. From Art 1

The Congress shall have Power... To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

Along with the 2ed Amendment it's one of the few places in the Constitution that states a purpose... both are being ignored.

So is any patent for an idea designed just to create vendor lock, hence profits, and not "progress" therefore unconstitutional? Does abuse of the patent system harm the economy more than promote progress?


I'm not sure if there's a patent involved in this example or not... but assume there is. HP recently created new firmware for their printers so third party ink cartridges would not work after a certain date. Their rational.... to protect their intellectual property.

According to http://www.myce.com/news/hp-officially-responds-pre-programmed-failure-date-non-hp-cartridges-80467/

Now HP confirmed this was intentional to the Dutch public broadcasting station ‘NOS’.

“HP printers reject non-HP cartridges in several cases. This is protect innovation and intellectual property, but also to improve the safety of products for customers” , HP told the NOS in a statement. HP also added that, “the company indeed made changes to the software of several printer types”.

The changes are made according to HP, “to protect the printers and to protect the communication between the cartridge and the printer.”

“Affected printers will continue to work with refilled cartridges if they contain the original HP security chip. Other cartridges possibly don’t work”, HP added.




26 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
I wouldn't say that it's unconstitutional or unethical FBaggins Sep 2016 #1
of course they are freebies... eniwetok Sep 2016 #3
I think there is an unstated assumption in the Constitutional provision . . . markpkessinger Sep 2016 #9
no time limit... BUT eniwetok Sep 2016 #12
Again, you are arguing that the time limit set by Congress exceeds what is necessary . . . markpkessinger Sep 2016 #14
Actually, I seriously doubt a court would even be willing to hear such a case . . . markpkessinger Sep 2016 #19
Do you think whether a book is protected by the copyright law should depend on its content? onenote Sep 2016 #17
I don't know if it's a patent issue sharp_stick Sep 2016 #2
many companies would rather not compete eniwetok Sep 2016 #4
Sure, but consumers continue to have other purchase options available . . . markpkessinger Sep 2016 #10
or, this is a pathology of capitalism eniwetok Sep 2016 #11
For better or worse, the principle of 'caveat emptor' is deeply embedded in US law and jurisprudence markpkessinger Sep 2016 #15
No wonder my printer won't print meow2u3 Sep 2016 #5
Patenting has nothing to do with your issue with HP. And they're not "abusing" anything. WillowTree Sep 2016 #6
you're evading the issue... eniwetok Sep 2016 #8
I'm evading nothing. WillowTree Sep 2016 #16
PKB eniwetok Sep 2016 #20
if patents could only be issued to encourage technical or scientific progress onenote Sep 2016 #18
copyrights are limited eniwetok Sep 2016 #21
not a response to the point i was making onenote Sep 2016 #24
Oops, I misread your post eniwetok Sep 2016 #22
You're still missing the point onenote Sep 2016 #25
That didn't work out so well for Kuerig and their coffee maker. bluesbassman Sep 2016 #7
US patent and copyright law is largely irrelevant lumberjack_jeff Sep 2016 #13
I thought this thread was going to be about this outrage Crabby Appleton Sep 2016 #23
I think your legal acumen should be directed to a fellow DUer in need..... msanthrope Sep 2016 #26
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Unconstitutional Abuse Of...