this post was submitted on 20 May 2026
883 points (99.1% liked)

Greentext

8294 readers
1017 users here now

This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.

Be warned:

If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Dsklnsadog@lemmy.dbzer0.com 127 points 1 week ago (31 children)
[–] stoy@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 week ago (27 children)

I disagree, if I spend time and money to figure out how to solve a problem efficiently, why shouldn't I get to profit from that idea?

The above only applies to hardware patents, software patents however should not extist.

Regardless, if a company are not actively using a patent, as in a product themselves or through licensing, for X years, then the patent should be void.

[–] Dsklnsadog@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I’m not anti-profit. I’m anti state-granted monopoly.

If you invented it first, you already have advantages: expertise, brand, speed, know-how, first-mover position, customer trust. Profit should come from executing better, not from getting the state to forbid competitors from improving on your idea.

Patents are not capitalism; they are government-enforced market exclusion.

[–] MrFinnbean@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago

Without patent protection it would be impossible to bring anything new on the market unless you were allready one of the big companies.

Expertise, brand, speed, know-how, first-mover position, customer trust etc. are wothless if multinational mega conglomerate can just copy your homework and use their wealth to quickly massproduce your thing and spread it to every market of the world.

load more comments (25 replies)
load more comments (28 replies)