d2jsp
Log InRegister
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > General Chat > Political & Religious Debate >
Poll > What Limitations Should Be Put On Copyrights? > Should The Copyright System Change?
Prev1456
Add Reply New Topic New Poll
  Guests cannot view or vote in polls. Please register or login.
Member
Posts: 2,908
Joined: May 24 2008
Gold: 1,307.69
Apr 5 2018 09:14am
Quote (Thor123422 @ Apr 5 2018 11:09am)
Nobody is claiming "your item". They are making their own items.

In this patent system the first person to invent it gets all the rights, and even if there are others who independently discovered your process they are forbidden from using it.

Usually, there are people right behind you on your invention or idea. You usually aren't some special snowflake that invented something nobody else or no other company could or would invent.


I get the idea, but for some inventions it becomes a mess to figure out if it's the product of independant research or pure plagiarism. Especially in markets where R&D costs are high.
Member
Posts: 64,656
Joined: Oct 25 2006
Gold: 260.11
Apr 5 2018 09:51am
Quote (Chainsaw47 @ Apr 5 2018 09:14am)
I get the idea, but for some inventions it becomes a mess to figure out if it's the product of independant research or pure plagiarism. Especially in markets where R&D costs are high.


Computers thrived under little to no patent protection and they required large r&d investment.

It takes time to set up facilities to manufacture products so you still have a good amount of time to profit and you have first brand advantage.
Member
Posts: 90,646
Joined: Dec 31 2007
Gold: 2,489.69
Apr 5 2018 10:00am
Quote (Thor123422 @ Apr 5 2018 09:51am)
Computers thrived under little to no patent protection and they required large r&d investment.

It takes time to set up facilities to manufacture products so you still have a good amount of time to profit and you have first brand advantage.


yeah these guys agree: :rolleyes:

Quote
Acorn Computers
Alliant Computer Systems - Ceased operations in 1992.
Altos Computer Systems - acquired by Acer in 1990.
Amdahl Corporation - A wholly owned subsidiary of Fujitsu since 1997.
Amstrad
Apollo Computer - Acquired by Hewlett-Packard in 1989.
Apricot Computers - ceased operations in 1999.
Ardent Computer - Merged with Stellar Computer to form Stardent in 1989.
AST Computers, LLC - Exited the computer market in 2001.
Atari Corporation
Bell & Howell
Burroughs - Merged with Sperry to form Unisys in 1986.
Celerity Computing - Acquired by Floating Point Systems in 1988.
Commodore International - declared bankruptcy in 1994.
Compaq - Acquired by Hewlett-Packard in 2002. Defunct as a subsidiary as of 2013.
CompuAdd - filed for bankruptcy in 1993.
Computer Automation
Control Data Corporation (CDC) - Shrank as units were spun off from 1988 to 1992; remainder is now Ceridian.
Convergent Technologies
Convex Computer - purchased by The Hewlett-Packard Company in 1995
Corona Data Systems - among the original "IBM PC Compatible" clone makers
Cromemco
Data General - was one of the first minicomputer firms from the late 1960s, purchased by EMC in 1999 for its innovative RAID array storage.
Digital Equipment Corporation - Acquired by Compaq in 1998.
Durango Systems Corporation merged with Molecular Systems in 1982 which went bankrupt in 1984
Eagle Computer - ceased operations in 1986.
Eckert–Mauchly Computer - Acquired by Remington Rand in 1950.
Egenera
Elonex — Sells tablets (as of 2011)
EMCC
Encore Computer - Acquired by Gores Technology Group in 1998 and renamed to Encore Real Time Computing.
English Electric - merged into International Computers Limited.
eMachines - Discontinued by its current owner Acer in 2012.
Escom
Everex - US subsidiary closed its doors in 2009.
Evesham - merged into TIME Computers.
Franklin Computer Corporation - exited computer hardware business and reorganized into Franklin Electronic Publishers.
Gateway - Acquired by Acer in October 2007
General Electric - Sold its computer division to Honeywell in 1970.
Gericom - Acquired by Quanmax then merged with S&T
Gould Electronics - Sold its computer division to Nippon Mining in 1988, who in turn sold it to Encore Computer later that year.
Hewlett-Packard - Spun off into Hewlett Packard Enterprise and renamed as HP Inc. in 2015
Honeywell - Sold its computer division to Groupe Bull in 1991.
International Computers and Tabulators (ICT) - merged into International Computers Limited.
International Computers Limited (ICL) - now part of Fujitsu.
Kaypro - filed for bankruptcy in 1992.
Leading Edge - Mid '80s leader in PC Clone for the masses - Manufacturing done first by Mitsubishi then Daewoo
Luxor AB - Ended in 1986 after being acquired by Nokia the previous year.
Magnavox - Philips PCs rebadged for the USA and Canada.[8]
Magnuson Computer Systems - filed for bankruptcy in the early 1980s.
Maxdata (Germany) - Insolvent in 2008; warranty for existing products taken over by then the Swiss Belinea AG (see Belinea), now owned by Bluechip Computer. Warranty for Belinea products purchased before 1 November 2008 is not serviced anymore by Bluechip Computer.[9]
Mitsubishi Electronics - Closed computer systems division in 1990 Manufactured systems for Leading Edge and Sperry-Unisys
MPC (formerly MicronPC) - Filed Chapter 11 bankruptcy on November 7, 2008. Efforts at reorganization failed.
Multiflow Computer - Ceased operations in 1990.
NeXT - acquired by Apple Computer in 1996.
Nixdorf Computer - Acquired by Siemens in 1991, renamed Siemens Nixdorf Informationssysteme AG.
Northgate Computer Systems - Acquired by Lan Plus in 1997, after filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 1994
Osborne Computer - Ceased operations in 1985; rights to the Osbourne brand were sold to Mikrolog.
Packard Bell - is now a subsidiary of Acer.
Philips - sold their PC division to Digital.[10]
Prime Computer - acquired by Parametric Technology Corporation.
Processor Technology - Ceased operations in 1979.
Psystar - Under 2009 permanent injunction to stop selling computers with Apple's Mac OS X operating system. Psystar's web site has disappeared.
Pyramid Technology - Acquired by Siemens in 1995.
Quantex Microsystems - Bankrupt in 2000.
Radio Shack
RCA - Exited the computer business in 1971; Sperry Rand took over RCA's installed base in 1972.
Research Machines - Exited manufacturing in late 2013. Brand continues as a services company.
Remington Rand - Acquired by Sperry to form Sperry Rand in 1955.
Sanyo - bought out by Panasonic
Scientific Data Systems - Acquired by Xerox in 1969.
Sequent Computer Systems - Acquired by IBM in 1999.
Siemens - Computer division (Siemens Nixdorf Informationssysteme AG) merged 50/50 with Fujitsu into Fujitsu Siemens Computers in 1999, then Siemens half bought by Fujitsu in 2009.
Silicon Graphics - acquired by Rackable Systems in 2009, when Rackable then re-branded to SGI, and later acquired by Hewlett Packard Enterprise in November 2016.
Sinclair Research - acquired by Amstrad in 1986.
Solbourne Computer - Acquired by Deloitte Consulting in 2008.
Soyo
Sperry - Merged with Burroughs to form Unisys in 1986.
Sperry Rand - Dropped "Rand" from its name in 1978 and continued as Sperry.
Stardent - Ceased operations in 1992.
Stratus Computer
Sun Microsystems - Acquired by Oracle Corporation in 2010.
Systems Engineering Laboratories - Acquired by Gould Electronics in 1981 and became Gould's computer division.
Tandon Corporation
Tandy Corporation - Previous parent company of RadioShack, produced the TRS-80 and Tandy 1000 and 2000 IBM PC compatible computers. Sold their computer division to AST Computers in the early 1990s.
Tiny Computers - merged into TIME Computers.
Texas Instruments
TriGem Computer - Declared bankrupt in 2012
Averatec - Averatec subsidiary goes out of business in 2012.
Tulip Computers - changed its name to Nedfield NV in 2008, pronounced bankrupt on 3 September 2009.
Vigor Gaming (USA) - Disappeared in March 2010
VoodooPC
VTech
Wang Laboratories - acquired by Getronics in 1999.
Wipro - Ceased PC manufacturing.
Xerox - Exited the computer business.
Zenith Data Systems - Merged With Packard Bell and NEC in 1996
Zeos - merged into MPC Corporation in 1996, which in turn filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 2008.


Apple has put whole companies out of business by stealing from them and claiming it was their work.

Keep in mind i'm not strictly against this practice generally, but to say "computers thrived" doesnt seem correct, as many of the companies that started up were sabotaged or competed out of business.
Member
Posts: 2,908
Joined: May 24 2008
Gold: 1,307.69
Apr 5 2018 10:10am
Quote (Thor123422 @ Apr 5 2018 11:51am)
Computers thrived under little to no patent protection and they required large r&d investment.

It takes time to set up facilities to manufacture products so you still have a good amount of time to profit and you have first brand advantage.


I agree with the second part, but it doesn't apply to all industries. I work in metallurgy and some industrial processes do require huge investments and years to copy, but for pharmaceutical companies, the work and time is in the design, not the manufacturing.

As for the first part, Microsoft and Apple probably put more companies out of business than most other companies combined in thr world, mostly by using patent protection.
Member
Posts: 16,621
Joined: Jan 7 2017
Gold: 90.58
Apr 5 2018 10:11am
Quote (Plaguefear @ Mar 15 2018 02:15pm)
I personally think if a copyright is out of use for more than 5 years it should enter the public domain, this flow of muse into the public domain will feed greater creativity and better art over time.
It would be like a new renaissance, look at how much greatness comes from the current tiny public domain already, pretty much everything that made disney famous before they started making original work and copyrighting all of it, robbin hood, king arthur, all the classics..
Imagine if that pool included all the lost copyrights that went to huge corporations just buying up defunct smaller ones then sitting on it forever..
Most of the games i played as a kid no longer exist and will never be seen again because they are abandoned because the current owner probably has never heard of the content and may even be unaware they own it.


What do you define "out of use"?
Member
Posts: 64,656
Joined: Oct 25 2006
Gold: 260.11
Apr 5 2018 04:29pm
Quote (thesnipa @ Apr 5 2018 10:00am)
yeah these guys agree: :rolleyes:

Apple has put whole companies out of business by stealing from them and claiming it was their work.

Keep in mind i'm not strictly against this practice generally, but to say "computers thrived" doesnt seem correct, as many of the companies that started up were sabotaged or competed out of business.


Companies aren't computer technology. Computer technology thrived and we didn't' stop seeing advancements just because their technology could be implemented by others.

Just listing the number of failed, acquired, or changed businesses isn't really meaningful in this discussion.

Also a good portion of these are recent, not during the hayday of computer development that was silicon valley in the 70's, 80's and 90's.

Quote (Chainsaw47 @ Apr 5 2018 10:10am)
I agree with the second part, but it doesn't apply to all industries. I work in metallurgy and some industrial processes do require huge investments and years to copy, but for pharmaceutical companies, the work and time is in the design, not the manufacturing.

As for the first part, Microsoft and Apple probably put more companies out of business than most other companies combined in thr world, mostly by using patent protection.


The second part favors my position, in that they couldn't do that if we stopped having patent protection.

If anybody can implement it then your idea probably isn't worth protecting.

Either way, you have the first-brand advantage. If you get doctors to start prescribing your medication first it's a clear advantage and you will have to put effort into getting them to change to the second brand. So you still have an advantage.

This post was edited by Thor123422 on Apr 5 2018 04:31pm
Member
Posts: 48,765
Joined: Jun 19 2006
Gold: 1.93
Apr 5 2018 04:54pm
Quote (thesnipa @ Apr 6 2018 02:13am)
i guess. that's not really the entirety of it tho.

large pharma does most of the R&D while smaller producers knock them off. large pharma has the distribution and connections in healthcare to lobby for their products to be used. They wont stop production after break even, but if they're guaranteed to AT LEAST break even it shouldn't cool off innovation as much as a system where short patents are the norm with no profit taken into consideration. it is also motivated by the way medicines are tested, their ingredients must be listed. so knocking them off is a lot easier than trying to figure out what 23 flavors are in Diet Dr Pepper and how much of each creates that sweeeet flavor.

medicine is something we as humans need to continue to innovate, so innovation is a key part. expecting people to innovate for a risky profit imo wont work.



that's fine and dandy but "usually" isnt a word that translates to legal protection.

if i create the shamwow and no one else was even close i should get the most protection for it, which means people who make common products do too. we have to make all encompassing laws then let the courts differentiate special cases.

im not sure if u read my context wrong but im simply arguing against what i think plague's extreme view is, that society in part owns everyone's work if it is for the good of that society. i disagree and would prefer the present flawed system to that flawed hypothetical system.


The Wright brothers only invented one part of a working airplane that literally everyone else in aviation would have came up with then spent decades suing anyone else who tried to make a plane in America.
When the first world war started America had to borrow planes off France because the two idiots being hailed as the inventor of the air plane held you back so much that the rest of the world passed you.
Go Back To Political & Religious Debate Topic List
Prev1456
Add Reply New Topic New Poll