On the premises of the socialist revolution in copyright

    The news of the opening of Tesla Motors patents gave rise to an incredible discussion about the role and significance of this act. Some accuse Ilon Mask of excessive enthusiasm for PR, while others, on the contrary, think of him as a guru and a benefactor of society. The second group is more numerous, because those who know about Tesla Motors are mainly its supporters. Automotive retrogs are simply not drawn into it. In my humble opinion, the truth in this matter lies not even in the middle, but in general on the side of the discussion about the moral character of the Mask.

    If you look at the patenting trends of the last ten years, you can see that patents go through a gradual stage of reforming from a proprietary model to the prevalence of public interests.

    Immediately make a reservation that I am not a socialist, Marxist or communist. Moreover, I actively support the idea of ​​banning the Communist Party of Ukraine. Therefore, those who seek food here for their political ideas may not read further.

    Of all the "... istov" I remain within the framework of my profession as a lawyer, who is a bit addicted to history. And solely within the framework of this view, I can outline some touches that seriously relate the processes that occur in copyright with the so-called socialist revolutions.

    If you look at patents and copyright in general as a means of production, you can see that their main resources are concentrated in the hands of a relatively small number of corporations. In each of the industries, small oligopolies can be distinguished within the framework of the world, by which the main race is carried out. Apple, Google, Microsoft - in software; Pfizer, Novatis, Merck & Co - in the pharmaceutical industry. Often there are more than three, but usually a dozen names occupy the lion's share of the market.

    The terms of patent protection and the absolute will of the owner fuel the contradictions between him and society. An example is the problem with medicine patents mentioned in the Pope’s speech in 2009. It is not worth explaining once again that if the head of one of the most influential denominations in the world speaks of a problem, then it has long gone beyond the scope of judicial warriors.

    The answer to such a usurpation of the means of production is the fierce Makhnovism of industrial espionage and electronic piracy. Unambiguously calculating its volumes is extremely difficult, but it is worth mentioning that the accusations of industrial espionage did not bypass the largest companies in the world.

    In the unfolding conflict over the establishment of new rules on the use of the means of production of the state and national legislation often become an instrument, not an arbiter. There is no single decision-making center, so you should not expect from this process spectacular seizures of buildings, horse attacks or high-profile overthrows. The struggle of patents will follow the path of the market and will be conducted in the plane of their price and connection with the price of the goods. Elon Musk, having made his patents public, he significantly strengthened the capitalization of his company’s name. He can be said to have transferred money from patents to the brand. It is likely that his company received any implicit bonuses from the government or representatives of another industry. I cannot and will not build hypotheses regarding the motivation of this particular person. But I am convinced which is exactly the same (although for various reasons) others will follow his example. This will lead to a change in the balance in the patent market. Then the conflict of copyright holders and society will take on other forms. The act of the Mask is unusual, but, from the point of view of history, this is another logical step.

    Also popular now: