[posix86]

Not just small, also big companies. Why spent billions of dollars researching a new technology when, as soon as you figure it out, someone else copies it for a millionth of the cost? The dominant strategy will be just to wait for others, which might slow progress a lot.

[thereddaikon]

You're thinking of patents which are similar but concern technical inventions whereas copyright is for creative works. And then you have trademarks which are for business branding. They are all government enforced monopolies on ideas but different kinds of ideas, each with limitations and with the intent to facilitate economic activity. Reforming copyright shouldn't have an effect on patent law.

[LtWorf]

Copyright and patents aren't the same at all.

[kasey_junk]

But they protect creators in the same sorts of ways.

[goodpoint]

No, they were supposed to protect creators. Now they protect big corps and harm small ones and people.

[chrismcb]

I'm not sure how they (copyrights? Patents?) Harm small ones and people?

For copyrights it works be nice to get some of our culture sooner, but I don't think it harms us. Same for patents. You can make an argument that both should be shorter. I would also accept that software patents shouldn't exist)I think they are definitely rubber stamped to much) but how is the small creator harmed?

[LtWorf]

They patent anything, and DCMA takedowns are basically random. After that, if you can't afford lawyers you're screwed regardless of the validity of the claim.

[goodpoint]

Orgs with big budgets create large patent portfolios that use as a legal weapon against small companies. It's widely documented.

[kasey_junk]

I don’t know how you can hold the position that copyrights do that but patents don’t.

[goodpoint]

I never said that and I don't. Both copyrights and patents are being weaponized by big players.

[johnnyanmac]

so... like copyright?

[dventimi]

Well, they're the same at least insofar as they're government-granted monopolies.