Post AcImAL1g2Hxi34qZ72 by djspiewak@fosstodon.org
(DIR) More posts by djspiewak@fosstodon.org
(DIR) Post #AcImACU3nOJnYV3bbU by acowley@mastodon.social
2023-11-29T13:52:31Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
I’d love to learn more about an effort like Apple’s to develop their own 5G modem. Are all the difficulties related to patents, or is there something intrinsic? I feel like RF is a weird field where you encounter solutions that are plainly superior to alternatives to the point where it seems like magic. https://www.macrumors.com/2023/11/29/apple-5g-modem-discontinued-reports/
(DIR) Post #AcImAEMKp5KLN7SSq8 by djspiewak@fosstodon.org
2023-11-29T13:57:37Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@acowley My guess based on less than zero knowledge is the patents are fairly comprehensive. There are a few areas where this situation arises (video codecs are another good example), and it ends up being practically impossible to do anything that works well and avoids unintentionally infringing on prior IP. Given the stakes, it's a guarantee that Qualcomm would maximally enforce their rights, so that paints Apple into a very small box.
(DIR) Post #AcImAFnfSwmjqBFo5A by acowley@mastodon.social
2023-11-29T14:03:09Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@djspiewak Yeah, I think you’re right. Patents so often seem like an own-goal by a society that loses perspective on their limitations. With RF and video, you sometimes see the interesting developments in countries not inclined to adhere to IP protections. It can be hard to see much of an upside to centralizing the opportunity to innovate in these spaces in a couple giant corporations.
(DIR) Post #AcImAH3IoIsxixZo5g by djspiewak@fosstodon.org
2023-11-29T14:07:57Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@acowley Patents are IMO a good idea, but the structure is so anachronistic that they've lost all connection to their goal. The concept is to ensure that knowledge isn't lost entirely by giving an incentive for sharing it: a time-limited monopoly. One of the many problems today though is most tech inventions already have a very short shelf-life before obsolescence, so the time-limited modifier is somewhat meaningless: it's just an absolute monopoly. And of course, monopolies are good business.
(DIR) Post #AcImAIOxnFo3uQicUa by acowley@mastodon.social
2023-11-29T14:04:34Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@djspiewak But, you know, even if it’s 99% patents, I think it’d be really interesting to read a detailed account of the efforts made. The incentives couldn’t be higher, so you’ve got to figure the attempts to make it work have been epic.
(DIR) Post #AcImAIRRe1n827sbMO by djspiewak@fosstodon.org
2023-11-29T14:09:16Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@acowley I think that if we were reinventing that whole mechanism (patents) with no prior art, we would end up with something that looks a lot different. Same goals, more than likely, but very different mechanics, particularly in light of the fact that people don't need much encouragement these days to write things down, and so inventions are almost never truly lost anymore, with or without patents.
(DIR) Post #AcImAK33ffTN14U9cu by acowley@mastodon.social
2023-11-29T14:15:29Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@djspiewak That aspect of preserving inventions also seems somewhat at odds with the legal monopoly aspect in that the way you describe something for the purposes of preservation is going to be pretty wildly distorted by the incentive to broaden the claimed scope of the invention. Whenever I think in detail about writing something like patent law I conclude that I’m glad I’m not a lawyer.
(DIR) Post #AcImAL1g2Hxi34qZ72 by djspiewak@fosstodon.org
2023-11-29T14:22:57Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@acowley Well the original problem statement was avoiding situations where inventors hoarded their secrets and the knowledge ended up dying with them (very common prior to the 19th century), which in aggregate is quite bad for society. Obviously it's great that this no longer happens, but equally-obviously we have created a destructive minefield of multi-century terribleness in the jurisprudence around this whole space.
(DIR) Post #AcImAM5y3ozLMfrVRI by djspiewak@fosstodon.org
2023-11-29T14:24:24Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@acowley I think a lot of the really perverse incentives ultimately come from the combination of the accumulated precedent together with the fact that the entire modern economy is based on IP, something that the creators of the patent system simply could not have foreseen.
(DIR) Post #AcImAN9Y7zRoe4Xsf2 by alexelcu@social.alexn.org
2023-11-29T14:46:56Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@djspiewak You mentioned trade secrets, but there's another aspect to patents… the cost of research.In some situations, research is super expensive, but copying the result is super cheap. Example: drugs or vaccines, which can't be kept as a trade secret, once produced and distributed. You can argue that medicine shouldn't be patented, but capitalism drives innovation, and you only have to look at the state of healthcare in the former USSR to see evidence of it.@acowley
(DIR) Post #AcImscdVvGG7PKf2gq by acowley@mastodon.social
2023-11-29T14:55:02Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@alexelcu @djspiewak Is there a way of constructing things to protect investment that doesn’t lead to a consolidation end state with one or two remaining players?
(DIR) Post #AcInL3qaLZG5uPKsKW by alexelcu@social.alexn.org
2023-11-29T15:00:12Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@acowley The problem is, I think, with trivial patents, which can be used to prolong existing patents. Like, you have an invention, and then you keep adding stuff to it, generating new patents, gatekeeping other companies from using it.Patents are perfectly fine if they are expensive to research, or can be kept as trade secrets. Many patents don't pass this threshold, and I have no ideas on how to fix it.@djspiewak