[LosWochosWeek]

> Ultimately its probably better if we move to a world where a lot of "intellectual property" expires with it's holder and passes into the public domain.

I fully agree with you (and it's one of the few strongly held opinions of mine), but I'm not really sure why you would bring this up within the context of patent trolls. Patents do run out, rather quickly even.

It's other intellectual property -- namely copyright -- that needs to run out way faster. The trademark system that we have right now is alright imo and doesnt need to be "fixed".

[nonrandomstring]

Understood, please allow me clarify.

Not to get off-topic with copyright despite being an "older author", notwithstanding the sibling comments, I'd agree it's too long.

Now, it's nice that patents time-out quite quickly, and indeed that motivates for useful development, but what I'm talking about is adding serial (AND) conditions that require they're capable of being used.

Alice has a fresh patent on a method for manufacturing a drug. She can sell it to Bob who also runs a pharmaceutical company and is in the process of expanding his portfolio of medicines. If Alice sells it to Charlie who runs a hair salon and fashion company, because Charlie, who is not in the business of making medicines, she cannot sue or leverage using that patent in any way or it's immediately null and void. Charlie doesn't have an "interest" in the patent and so loses the patent by misusing it, without any further need to prove the patent invalid. Crazy as that may sound to some, I think its a reasonable amendment to present law.

[CuriousSkeptic]

> Charlie doesn't have an "interest" in the patent and so loses the patent

Wow, I like the direction of this, pragmatic enough to get implemented but also on its way to establish the commons as a party in the deal.

I’ve long thought that the commons need a stronger representation in policy.

[klabb3]

I like the spirit of this idea but wouldn't this just incentivize mega conglomerates to acquire patents? Or are you hoping that they will act in better faith than the pure trolls?

[melony]

The marginal cost of writing and creative artwork is even lower than software, not being able to profit from Mickey Mouse doesn't create significant harm to society.

[TimPC]

Many authors do some of their best work late in their lives and it would be a sad society if we stopped funding the art projects of those who got ill or aged because of inability to generate profits from them. The right interval for copyrights is larger than the zero years after death that many advocate for. It's certainly less than 75 years after death though, so there is massive room for improvement.

[gibspaulding]

Perhaps "Life, or X years, whichever comes last" would be an appropriate balance. We can, of course, still argue over what the value of X should be.