On the prerequisites of the socialist revolution in copyright
The discovery of Tesla Motors patents has given rise to an incredible discussion about the role and significance of this act. Some people convict Ilona Mask of excessive enthusiasm for public relations, others, on the contrary, consider him a guru and benefactor of society. The second group is more numerous, because those who know about Tesla Motors are mainly its supporters. Retrogrades automotive simply not drawn into it. In my humble opinion, the truth in this matter lies not even in the middle, but in general, to the side of the discussion about the moral character of Mask.
If you look at the trends in patenting over the past ten years, you can see that patents are going through a gradual phase of reform from the proprietary model to the prevalence of public interest.
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 bounds of my legal profession, who is a little keen on history. And solely within the framework of this view, I can identify some of the touches that seriously unite those processes that take place in copyright with the so-called socialist revolutions.
')
If you look at patents and copyright as a whole as a means of production, you will notice that their main resources are concentrated in the hands of a relatively small number of corporations. In each of the industries can be distinguished small oligopolies within the framework of the world, which is the main race. Apple, Google, Microsoft - in the software; Pfizer, Novatis, Merck & Co - in pharmaceuticals. 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 inflate the contradictions between him and society. As an example, we can mention the problem with patents for drugs mentioned in the speech of the Pope in 2009. It is not worth explaining once again that if the head of one of the most influential confessions in the world speaks of a problem, then it has long gone beyond the bounds of judicial warrior.
The answer to such a usurpation of the means of production is the fierce Makhnovshchina industrial espionage and electronic piracy. It is extremely difficult to calculate unequivocally its volumes, however 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 laws often become a tool, not an arbitrator. There is no single decision-making center here, so one should not expect spectacular building seizures, equestrian attacks, or loud overthrows from this process. 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. Ilon Musk, having made his patents open, he significantly strengthened the capitalization of his company name. It can be said that he transferred money from patents to a brand. It is likely that his company received any implicit bonuses from the government or representatives of another industry. I can not and will not build hypotheses regarding the motivation of this particular person. But I am convinced that in the same way (although for different reasons) others will follow his example. This will lead to a change in the balance of the patent market. Then the conflict of right holders and society will take on other forms. Deed Mask is unusual, but, from the point of view of history - this is another logical step.
If you look at the trends in patenting over the past ten years, you can see that patents are going through a gradual phase of reform from the proprietary model to the prevalence of public interest.
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 bounds of my legal profession, who is a little keen on history. And solely within the framework of this view, I can identify some of the touches that seriously unite those processes that take place in copyright with the so-called socialist revolutions.
')
If you look at patents and copyright as a whole as a means of production, you will notice that their main resources are concentrated in the hands of a relatively small number of corporations. In each of the industries can be distinguished small oligopolies within the framework of the world, which is the main race. Apple, Google, Microsoft - in the software; Pfizer, Novatis, Merck & Co - in pharmaceuticals. 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 inflate the contradictions between him and society. As an example, we can mention the problem with patents for drugs mentioned in the speech of the Pope in 2009. It is not worth explaining once again that if the head of one of the most influential confessions in the world speaks of a problem, then it has long gone beyond the bounds of judicial warrior.
The answer to such a usurpation of the means of production is the fierce Makhnovshchina industrial espionage and electronic piracy. It is extremely difficult to calculate unequivocally its volumes, however 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 laws often become a tool, not an arbitrator. There is no single decision-making center here, so one should not expect spectacular building seizures, equestrian attacks, or loud overthrows from this process. 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. Ilon Musk, having made his patents open, he significantly strengthened the capitalization of his company name. It can be said that he transferred money from patents to a brand. It is likely that his company received any implicit bonuses from the government or representatives of another industry. I can not and will not build hypotheses regarding the motivation of this particular person. But I am convinced that in the same way (although for different reasons) others will follow his example. This will lead to a change in the balance of the patent market. Then the conflict of right holders and society will take on other forms. Deed Mask is unusual, but, from the point of view of history - this is another logical step.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/226967/
All Articles