Comment on Anon is a gamer

<- View Parent
Dsklnsadog@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

Your proposal is definitely less bad than the current system, but it still assumes innovation needs a government referee deciding who gets exclusivity, for how long, and when taxpayers should compensate private research.

That’s the part I can’t get behind.

If the product is not commercially viable without monopoly protection or public reimbursement, maybe the business model is the issue. And if the government reimburses the company, that just means society absorbs the risk while the company keeps the upside.

Who decides the reimbursement amount? Who pays for failed research? Taxpayers? Competing companies? Consumers?

Private companies should be rewarded by the market when they create value, not guaranteed protection from competition and then reimbursed when the state decides the invention is important.

Shorter patents reduce the damage, but they don’t remove the contradiction: a “limited monopoly” is still a monopoly.

source
Sort:hotnewtop