February 22, 2013 at 23:28Announcement of the value of intellectual property at registration
Go to post habrahabr.ru/post/170391
Maybe this is not a good idea, but let's just discuss it. It is interesting.
Indeed, if:
- the copyright holder declares the price of his intellectual property literally when registering the rights,
- this price will be public,
- the cost of registering the right may well be tied to its value,
... the number of legal problems in the media and IT markets will decrease by an order of magnitude.
For example, for many years they have not been able to adopt any single format for streaming and supporting browser video, they are afraid to use open formats because of the risk of possible claims from undetected copyright holders. If the cost of compensation is known in advance, it will be much easier for investors to determine financing methods, and we would all have Skype in browsers and many other technological benefits for a long time.
Progress would be 5-10 years ahead of the current situation.
Programs and media would be much cheaper. And at the same time, programmers, directors, actors and musicians would receive more money. Just because uncles with lawyers will get less.
Want to claim a billion? Declare! Only pay 1% duty. Just 10 million. This will insure against inadequate ratings.
It is known that Microsoft receives an order of magnitude greater revenue from Android trolling than from sales of Windows 8. When the cost limit is announced, these mechanisms will have a much smaller effect on slowing down technological and creative progress.
The fact is that if at the stage of registering a patent its cost will be limited, then it will not increase during resale - namely, in this way the trolls create packages to receive compensation. In this case, Google could get off a much smaller amount.
Thus, microsoft will not invest in paying for registration of rights - simply because at the time of actual registration these projects are not known and are not interesting to microsoft.
Still understand what consumers ultimately pay?
Any adequate investor plans their profits. By investing a certain amount - expects to receive a minimum or nominal income.
In fact, it is profitable and interesting - to include the cost of paying the fee in the investment project, but for this fee get insurance of your own rights. Thus secure your project.
Unlike the long and expensive patent search procedure (at least 100 thousand rubles and one year - did you know that?), It is possible to create a simplified mechanism that will be cheaper and faster, and therefore more accessible to a wide range of users.
Developed a program, made a film, wrote a song. Do you rate it in a million? Register the right by paying 10 thousand. In the case of precedents, you’ll judge exactly a million, taking into account the refinancing rate to compensate for inflation.
Let's take off the pink glasses, and look at how this is actually happening now.
The programmer Ivan wrote the codec, and sold it to businessman Moshe for $ 500. Moysha sold it to Microsoft for $ 50,000. Microsoft quietly released it into free swimming, waited until its support appears on androids - and it rolls Google's lawsuit for $ 5,000,000, thereby slowing down the latter’s investment in technological progress. Or $ 10-50 for each device sold.
Alternative option. Ivan registers the rights to $ 5,000 by paying a $ 50 fee. Whatever happens with its development in the future, no one will blackmail Google or have android users, just because the cost of lawyers will be more than the maximum amount of the claim.
And the main thing - Ivan will be able to have a gesheft quite comfortably, an order of magnitude more, although without the participation of Moishe.
The costs of registration of rights, patent search, legal expenses, payment of lawyers and lawyers, even the services of notaries - those who wish to protect their rights in any case pay.
We pay when registering cars, real estate, large or important contracts - no one is outraged by this.
Mechanisms providing for the cost of paying the duty are already working.
There are many limitations, and they are already working.
Why aren't decisions like the ones described in this article still made? The first assumption is obvious - just patent trolls are not profitable.
Maybe this is not a good idea, but let's just discuss it. It is interesting.
Indeed, if:
- the copyright holder declares the price of his intellectual property literally when registering the rights,
- this price will be public,
- the cost of registering the right may well be tied to its value,
... the number of legal problems in the media and IT markets will decrease by an order of magnitude.
For example, for many years they have not been able to adopt any single format for streaming and supporting browser video, they are afraid to use open formats because of the risk of possible claims from undetected copyright holders. If the cost of compensation is known in advance, it will be much easier for investors to determine financing methods, and we would all have Skype in browsers and many other technological benefits for a long time.
Progress would be 5-10 years ahead of the current situation.
Programs and media would be much cheaper. And at the same time, programmers, directors, actors and musicians would receive more money. Just because uncles with lawyers will get less.
Patent trolls choke
Want to claim a billion? Declare! Only pay 1% duty. Just 10 million. This will insure against inadequate ratings.
It is known that Microsoft receives an order of magnitude greater revenue from Android trolling than from sales of Windows 8. When the cost limit is announced, these mechanisms will have a much smaller effect on slowing down technological and creative progress.
The fact is that if at the stage of registering a patent its cost will be limited, then it will not increase during resale - namely, in this way the trolls create packages to receive compensation. In this case, Google could get off a much smaller amount.
Thus, microsoft will not invest in paying for registration of rights - simply because at the time of actual registration these projects are not known and are not interesting to microsoft.
Still understand what consumers ultimately pay?
Investor rights will not be infringed
Any adequate investor plans their profits. By investing a certain amount - expects to receive a minimum or nominal income.
In fact, it is profitable and interesting - to include the cost of paying the fee in the investment project, but for this fee get insurance of your own rights. Thus secure your project.
Unlike the long and expensive patent search procedure (at least 100 thousand rubles and one year - did you know that?), It is possible to create a simplified mechanism that will be cheaper and faster, and therefore more accessible to a wide range of users.
Authors rights will be protected.
Developed a program, made a film, wrote a song. Do you rate it in a million? Register the right by paying 10 thousand. In the case of precedents, you’ll judge exactly a million, taking into account the refinancing rate to compensate for inflation.
Let's take off the pink glasses, and look at how this is actually happening now.
The programmer Ivan wrote the codec, and sold it to businessman Moshe for $ 500. Moysha sold it to Microsoft for $ 50,000. Microsoft quietly released it into free swimming, waited until its support appears on androids - and it rolls Google's lawsuit for $ 5,000,000, thereby slowing down the latter’s investment in technological progress. Or $ 10-50 for each device sold.
Alternative option. Ivan registers the rights to $ 5,000 by paying a $ 50 fee. Whatever happens with its development in the future, no one will blackmail Google or have android users, just because the cost of lawyers will be more than the maximum amount of the claim.
And the main thing - Ivan will be able to have a gesheft quite comfortably, an order of magnitude more, although without the participation of Moishe.
In fact, this might already work.
The costs of registration of rights, patent search, legal expenses, payment of lawyers and lawyers, even the services of notaries - those who wish to protect their rights in any case pay.
We pay when registering cars, real estate, large or important contracts - no one is outraged by this.
Mechanisms providing for the cost of paying the duty are already working.
Restrictions on freedom of commerce or market regulation?
There are many limitations, and they are already working.
Why aren't decisions like the ones described in this article still made? The first assumption is obvious - just patent trolls are not profitable.