With all of the problems associated with the US patent process today comes the recurring debate over the purpose of patents.
One line of thought is that patents exist to protect the rights of inventors with, I guess, the main right being the ability to prevent anyone else from making a profit from an idea without the inventor's permission.
However, my question is, wouldn't people still invent even if they could not profit from their ideas?
Also, with the pretense that "necessity is the mother of invention" and the premise that "problems" normally equate to "necessities", what happens, in terms of inventing solutions to problems, when all of the best solutions have no potential for profit?
No comments:
Post a Comment