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

FBaggins

(26,727 posts)

1. I wouldn't say that it's unconstitutional or unethical

Reply to eniwetok (Original post)

Tue Sep 20, 2016, 12:58 PM

Sep 2016

I'd also hesitate to characterize essential intellectual property rights as "freebies provided by government"

However - I would say that printers are cheap and if I had an HP that stopped accepting generic cartridges... I would replace the printer.

OTOH - computer games used to be much more expensive (relatively) because they were using legal purchasers to offset losses caused by software pirating. If HP is successful in forcing people to use HP-branded supplies and then dramatically lowers the cost of their name-brand cartridges... that might be different.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

26 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Unconstitutional Abuse Of Patent System? [View all] eniwetok Sep 2016 OP

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