Mr Skeptic Posted December 1, 2007 Share Posted December 1, 2007 Article I, section 8 of the US Constitution "The Congress shall have power ... To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;" The wording does suggest that Congress may only grant exclusive rights in order to promote the progress of science and the useful arts. But if granting these exclusive rights actually reduces progress, it would be unconstitutional, right? As it is, patents have little use (they are often not detailed enough to be much use), and instead are a hindrance. In many cases, employees are forbidden to read patents, as that way when they get sued for patent infringement on something similar they developed, they can argue that they invented it independently. In this age of information, there must be a better way to promote progress than with patents. Also, it says that Congress may grant exclusive rights to the inventors and authors, not to megacorporations that buy them from the inventors/authors. Copyright violation isn't theft, it's copyright violation. Just to nitpick a little more with D H, Copyright violation is refusing to accept the restrictions on our rights that Congress has placed on us by exclusively granting those rights to inventors and authors to promote the progress science and the useful arts. In particular, it is neither theft nor a violation of anyone's rights (it is a refusal to accept a restriction on your rights). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!Register a new account
Already have an account? Sign in here.Sign In Now