This is Screech's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following Screech's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
Recent Activity
Kevin, there may not be any less favorable parts. I assume it's all good for the ones it's for. They're gonna love it. I assume this will take away their business risk. Who wouldn't love that?
Toggle Commented Oct 16, 2014 on Unseal the Doomsday Book! at Credit Slips
Kevin is right, not that it's a valid reason for keeping secrets. These financial companies, big banks, can be expected to rearrange their affairs to qualify for the most free handouts they can. Is there a countermeasure for that? I dunno. The healthcare insurance companies have sure arranged themselves to benefit from Obamacare. The biggest example of that is Kaiser, which before Obamacare was nothing resembling insurance at all. They were a "prepaid medical service". Now, they are an insurance company. They had to be or they would not have been able to join the gravy train.
Toggle Commented Oct 16, 2014 on Unseal the Doomsday Book! at Credit Slips
Clearly, the actual purpose of patent "protection" is not protection for the inventor. The purpose is to require disclosure to protect society from inventions being kept secret. Keeping novel inventions secret would be bad and would not help society. The framers of the constitution knew this. In exchange for full disclosure the inventor gets a limited period of exclusive rights, after which the patent is public domain to be used by anyone. That helps society. As was touched on the contrast between pharmaceutical patents and software patents couldn't be more stark. A programmer can develop something ridiculous that could be gotten through the simple minded examiners at USPTO in 15 minutes at a cost of $11. This actually happens. It can even be obvious and non novel because the examiners just don't know. As they are attorneys they are comfortable with the "let the courts work it out" approach they have taken. But that approach badly damages innovation and harms society. Inventors often don't have the millions of dollars it would take to get a patent overturned because it's just obvious or even stupid. It happens every day. A pharmaceutical invention however might require 5 or 10 years of research, experimentation, testing to bring to market. Hundreds of millions of dollars. Without patents little of this would happen, investors would invest elsewhere. Clearly this is not in our best interest.
1 reply
Adam, you should make them address it in full. That's a big percentage. It would be worth it to be able to write about it.
Toggle Commented Jul 4, 2011 on Wire Transfer Fees at Credit Slips