Interestingly enough, the judge that struck down the aforementioned Apple-Moto lawsuit shared some pretty interesting opinions with Reuters yesterday...
Posner said some industries, like pharmaceuticals, had a better claim to intellectual property protection because of the enormous investment it takes to create a successful drug.Advances in software and other industries cost much less, he said, and the companies benefit tremendously from being first in the market with gadgets - a benefit they would still get if there were no software patents.
"It's not clear that we really need patents in most industries," he said.
- Reuters
Huh!? No patents? As great as that sounds to get a one-year old phone back on the shelves, is trashing the whole technology patent system really the answer? I have no idea.
That's why this week's Friday's Big Question is so fun. You give us the answer. What is your solution to fixing this broken system? Would you scrap it all together? Or make companies have to prove that they are capable of creating the technology before they patent it? Or maybe there needs to be increased description in the patents themselves, so as to avoid the vague patents that Apple has been using? For more info on this, read the great piece on Apple's strategy that my colleague Jeff McIntire wrote.
So here's the deal, if you have a great idea for a solution to what seems to be stifling actual innovation in the mobile communication landscape, then post it in the comments below. However, if you have a more thorough idea that you would like the opportunity to have included as part of this or future articles, e-mail it to us at our new nifty FBQ email address (fridaysbigquestion AT gmail DOT com). Please use this address to not just hit us up with your answer to this week's FBQ, but feel free to give us ideas for questions in the future.
