Hacker Read

bduerst | karma 10527 | avg karma 2.09 · 2012-10-31 23:03:53+00:00

I'm proposing that patents encourage the production and disclosure of new technology, and that the inventor has a temporary monopoly with which to re-cooperate the costs of doing so.

rbanffy | karma 158565 | avg karma 2.97 · 2012-11-01 10:05:13+00:00

Still, how much you spend inventing something is not related to how useful (or obvious) your invention is. If you spent US$ 10 million developing something obvious, you still don't deserve a patent on it.

bduerst | karma 10527 | avg karma 2.09 · 2012-11-01 17:06:39+00:00

>If you spent US$ 10 million developing something obvious, you still don't deserve a patent on it.

That's up to the USPTO to decide, not you.

reply

rbanffy | karma 158565 | avg karma 2.97 · 2012-11-01 18:20:44+00:00

Exactly. And how much money you spent developing your invention should not be taken into consideration. If you do it, you reward inefficiency.

bduerst | karma 10527 | avg karma 2.09 · 2012-11-01 17:20:06

Resource Efficiency is not a criteria for the USPTO, that's your own personal, subjective opinion.

nitrogen | karma 22058 | avg karma 2.02 · 2012-11-02 00:37:50+00:00

rbanffy wasn't suggesting otherwise. It was your comments that seemed to suggest that inefficient, expensive research should be more worthy of patents by virtue of being expensive.