Elektrine lite

← Feed

@hperrin@lemmy.ca

2026-11-11 17:48 UTC

They are certainly abused, but without them, there’s literally no protection from a big company stealing an entrepreneur’s idea and undercutting them. (Like what Facebook did to Snapchat.) They should be reformed, but I think providing protections to inventors is not inherently a bad idea.

Replies (4)

  • oh no the poor entrepenuer! Not. All software should be FOSS anyway.

    Open ##5520232

  • @LaggyKar@programming.dev 2026-11-12 07:45

    The problem here (similar to media codecs) is patents on interop, where if someone uses patents in a product or service, that pushes the patents onto not just people trying to directly compete, but also onto anyone trying to interoperate with that product or service, through no fault of their own. Thus abusing patents to block interoperability.

    Open ##5522628

  • @gian@lemmy.grys.it 2026-11-12 13:43

    They are certainly abused, but without them, there’s literally no protection from a big company stealing an entrepreneur’s idea and undercutting them. (Like what Facebook did to Snapchat.) Fine, then you should be granted a patent only if you actually use it in a product you sell. Patents are (now) a weapon for big companies to stop a potential competitor to even being able to compete.

    Open ##5523737

  • @verdare@piefed.blahaj.zone 2026-11-12 14:09

    In reality, patents and copyright almost never protect the “little guy,” and are exclusively to the benefit of large corporations. You don’t have functionally unlimited resources to throw at the legal system; They do. It is an idea that sounds reasonable on its face, but falls apart badly when you consider the realities of enforcement.

    Open ##5523848