By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
fatslob-:O said:
Teeqoz said:

If Google and Small Company #A has acces to the same tech and ideas, one of those two companies are gonna crush the other like an ant. I'll give you a hint, it's not Small Company #A.

 

Besides, what you describe is exactly the less innovative market I described. Startups would do nothing but siphon off the R&D of big companies, and they wouldn't dare to try an innovate, because the big boys could use their idea and crush them. With patents, both the big and the small players have to do their best to innovate continuously, aka more good ideas and more innovation which is better for the consumer.

More good ideas will come from the market driving companies to push more innovation, not patents ... 

It is most likely that Google will beat Small Company #A regardless but a patent system in place only serves to oust them even faster than without a patent system ...

Small companies will continue to innovate regardless of whatever the bigger companies do since ALL businesses are looking for an opportunity to maximize on profits and innovating can only do that ...

Sharing ideas and knowledge can only be a good thing, not a bad thing ... 


Except this isn't sharing for the sake of furthering knowledge, like it is in science, this is "sharing" of the kind where everyone are out to make the most money for themselves. People (especially small companies, since they have a competetive disadvantage) wouldn't dare to innovate, because the big boys could just use the exact same idea. It would be much smarter for them to let the big companies innovate, then just rip-off their idea. Thus you get fewer companies trying to anniovate, abd as a result, less innovation. BTW, if Small Company #A had access to better tech than Google, they'd have the competetive advantage, and thus a better chance to succeed than in a patentless world where they had access to the same tech.