Gametime IP bashes Masnick/TechDirt
In a post titled Innovation Is Either Bought Or Stolen , GameTime IP takes on Mike Masnick of Techdirt.
The post might have better been titled Invention is Either Bought or Stolen.
From a previous IPBiz post
Invention and innovation are not the same thing
Part of the confusion in patent reform is caused by the failure of certain legal academics to treat "innovation" and "invention" as distinct concepts.
In December 2006, in an article titled ON PATENT QUALITY AND PATENT REFORM [88 JPTOS 1068 ], LBE noted
To intellectual property attorneys, the world of patents is about the disclosure of inventions. The patent system is designed to provide incentives to inventors to disclose publicly inventions which are useful, novel, and non-obvious, thereby enhancing the public storehouse of knowledge and hopefully accelerating the rate of improvements to our lives. The deal between the public and the inventor is the exchange of information in return for a right to exclude for a finite time.
Businessmen are more concerned with innovation than with invention. Peter F. Drucker noted: Its [innovation's] criterion is not science or technology, but a change in the economic or social environment, a change in the behavior of people as consumers or producers. Innovation creates new wealth or new potential for action rather than mere knowledge. [FN4] In the book "The Innovator's Dilemma: When New Technologies Cause Great Firms to Fail," [FN5] Harvard professor Clayton M. Christensen does not once use the word patent. "Technology" as defined by Christensen means the processes by which an organization transforms labor, capital, materials, and information into products and services of greater value. Innovation is a change in technology.
The post might have better been titled Invention is Either Bought or Stolen.
From a previous IPBiz post
Invention and innovation are not the same thing
Part of the confusion in patent reform is caused by the failure of certain legal academics to treat "innovation" and "invention" as distinct concepts.
In December 2006, in an article titled ON PATENT QUALITY AND PATENT REFORM [88 JPTOS 1068 ], LBE noted
To intellectual property attorneys, the world of patents is about the disclosure of inventions. The patent system is designed to provide incentives to inventors to disclose publicly inventions which are useful, novel, and non-obvious, thereby enhancing the public storehouse of knowledge and hopefully accelerating the rate of improvements to our lives. The deal between the public and the inventor is the exchange of information in return for a right to exclude for a finite time.
Businessmen are more concerned with innovation than with invention. Peter F. Drucker noted: Its [innovation's] criterion is not science or technology, but a change in the economic or social environment, a change in the behavior of people as consumers or producers. Innovation creates new wealth or new potential for action rather than mere knowledge. [FN4] In the book "The Innovator's Dilemma: When New Technologies Cause Great Firms to Fail," [FN5] Harvard professor Clayton M. Christensen does not once use the word patent. "Technology" as defined by Christensen means the processes by which an organization transforms labor, capital, materials, and information into products and services of greater value. Innovation is a change in technology.
posted by Lawrence B. Ebert at 5:28 AM
1 Comments:
Perhaps I should clarify the title of my post. I don't agree with Masnick's characterization, but he essentially defines "innovation" as developing inventions into products.
Rather than argue semantics, I deduce from this is that he views the development of products as more significant than the conception of new inventions (never mind the fact that you'll only recycle products in the absence of invention).
In other words, people invent things, companies incorporate things that have been invented into products. Companies must either purchase (through employment or acquisition) or steal (through infringement) the inventions.
Applying this construct to industry representatives (such as Michelle Lee of Google), it became apparent to me that the companies lobbying for reform would prefer to steal.
Post a Comment
<< Home