Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

permaculture - [permaculture] Exploding the myth of patents and copyright

permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: permaculture

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "wenshidi@yahoo.co.uk" <wenshidi@yahoo.co.uk>
  • To: permaculture <permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: [permaculture] Exploding the myth of patents and copyright
  • Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2012 06:36:19 +0000 (GMT)

https://torrentfreak.com/history-shows-that-copyright-monopolies-prevent-creativity-and-innovation-120205/

History Shows That Copyright Monopolies Prevent Creativity And Innovation
March 5, 2012

We all too frequently hear that the copyright monopoly is supposed to
encourage creativity and that the patent monopoly is supposed to encourage
innovation. Most lawyers whose jobs depend on the belief in these myths even
claim that the monopolies fulfill these functions to the letter. But when we
look at history, a different pattern emerges.

Let’s start around the beginning of the Industrial Revolution. In that day
and age, copyright monopoly laws were in force in the United Kingdom, and
pretty much the United Kingdom alone (where they were enacted in 1557). You
know the “Made in Country X” that is printed or engraved on pretty much all
our goods? That originated as a requirement from the British Customs against
German-made goods, as a warning label that they were shoddy goods made in
Germany at the time. It spread to pretty much global use.

But Germany didn’t have copyright monopoly laws at this point in time, and
historians argue that was the direct cause of Germany’s engineering
excellence overtaking that of the United Kingdom. In the UK, knowledge of
handicrafts was expensive to come by. Books and the knowledge they carried
were locked down in the copyright monopoly construct, after all. In Germany,
however, the same knowledge was available at print cost – and thus,
engineering skills proliferated. With every new person learning engineering,
one more person started to improve the skill set for himself and for the
country at large. The result is that Germany still, 200 years later, has an
outstanding reputation for engineering skills – the rise of which are
directly attributable to a lack of the copyright monopoly.

There are more examples. Pharmaceutical companies argue how they absolutely,
positively need the knowledge monopolies we call patents in order to survive.
The company Novartis is one of the worse offenders here. The claim that
patent monopolies are needed is not only false in an objective light – as in
the patent monopolies not being needed at all today for the pharma industry –
but more interestingly, Novartis itself was founded in a time and place when
no such knowledge monopolies existed – more specifically, in Switzerland in
1758 and 1859. If the patent monopolies are so vital for success, how come
the pharmaceutical giants of today were successfully founded in their
complete absence?

Rather, the pattern here is that the people who have made it to the top push
for monopolies that will lock in their positions as kings of the hill and
prevent people who do something better from replacing them. It’s a power grab.

In Sweden, the telecoms infrastructure giant Ericsson was founded making a
telephone handset that directly infringed on a German patent from Siemens –
or at least, would have done so with today’s monopoly laws. A Norwegian
company later copied Ericsson in turn. Nobody cared. Today, with the patent
monopolies we have today, Ericsson would not have survived the first phone
call. And yet, Ericsson is one of the giants pushing for more restrictive
monopoly laws. Of course they are; they have been successfully founded
already. What innovative giants of tomorrow are we smothering stillborn
through these monopoly constructs?

Indeed, the United States itself celebrated breakers of the monopolies on
ideas and knowledge as national heroes when the country was in its infancy
and building its industries. When the US was still a British colony, the
United Kingdom had this idea that all refinement of raw material into
desirable products should happen on the soil of the United Kingdom, and only
there. Industrial secrets were closely guarded, and the United States sought
to break the stranglehold for its own benefit. When somebody brought the
British industrial secret of the textile mills to the United States, for
example, he was celebrated by getting an entire city named after him and
named a father of industry as such. Today, the same person would have been
indicted for industrial espionage.

Or why not take a look at Hollywood and the film industry? In the infancy of
filmmaking, there was a patent monopoly blanket on the entire concept of
moving pictures owned by Thomas Edison, who was adamant in claiming his legal
monopoly rights. In order for innovation in the area to flourish, the entire
industry moved from the then-hotseat of moviemaking, New York. They moved as
far away as they could, west across the entire country, and settled in a
suburb outside of Los Angeles. That was outside of the reach of Edison’s
patent monopoly lawyers at the time, and so, moviemaking took off big time.
Today, the fledgling industry wouldn’t have been outside of the reach of
those monopoly lawyers.

I could end with mentioning Internet and how monopolies try to tame it from
every angle, but I am sure everybody can fill in the blanks here. Just for
fun, we could mention Bill Gates’ famous quote that if people had taken out
patent monopolies when the web was still in its infancy, the industry would
be at a complete standstill today. It is consistent with the overall pattern.

The pattern here is clear: copyright monopolies and patent monopolies
encourage neither creativity nor innovation. Quite the opposite. Throughout
history, we observe that today’s giants were founded in their absence, and
today, these giants push for the harshening and enforcement of these
monopolies in order to remain kings of the hill, to prevent something new and
better from replacing them. Pushing for copyright monopolies and patent
monopolies was never a matter of helping others; it was a matter of kicking
away the ladder once you had reached the top yourself.

But for the rest of us, it makes no sense whatsoever to carve today’s giants
in stone. We want them to be replaced by something better, and the copyright
and patent monopolies prevent that.

About The Author

Rick Falkvinge is a regular columnist on TorrentFreak, sharing his thoughts
every other week. He is the founder of the Swedish and first Pirate Party, a
whisky aficionado, and a low-altitude motorcycle pilot. His blog at
falkvinge.net focuses on information policy.




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page