Deeper grievance? This is not "grievance", this is either "greed" or "fear".
They fear that Samsung is making a better product than they do; so they try to quash the competition by means of artificial monopoly-rights. simple as that.
Indeed the whole system did not ever work as intended, except for chemistry (where CHOOH and CHOOH2 are considered totally different things, and CHOOH2 is NOT a derivative of CHOOH); it's been a tax on innovation since the 18th century when Watt stalled the development of steam engines by 20 years with his patents.
Who in his right mind would be giving out government-granted injunctions (patents are not a monopoly granting you a right to do something; they grant you a right to keep everyone else from doing it. BIG difference to copyright) to anyone who wants them and NOT expect everyone to totally screw up everyone elses life?
Posted Jul 14, 2012 0:08 UTC (Sat) by giraffedata (subscriber, #1954)
[Link]
(patents are not a monopoly granting you a right to do something; they grant you a right to keep everyone else from doing it. BIG difference to copyright)
What difference do you see?
Copyright grants an author a monopoly on copying his work. It grants him the right to keep everyone else from copying it (or publicly performing it or preparing a derivative work). Copyright doesn't give the holder any right he wouldn't have in the absence of copyright.
Difference between patent and copyright
Posted Jul 19, 2012 3:24 UTC (Thu) by SEMW (guest, #52697)
[Link]
I think the 'big difference' Seegras refers to is that, unlike copyright, patents work equally well against someone who actually copies an invention and someone who comes up with the same invention completely independently. Unlike copyright, whether they actually plagiarised it doesn't matter. So patents give you a monopoly in a much stronger sense.