That was a very philosophical answer to my practical question 😁
Yes I am sorry. I thought to get a more practicle answer and then forgot it.
Practicle answer now:
I would argue, that IP is a stimulant for strong resilient monopolies to survive longer. The monopolists usually have the longer timepreference. So when they see a very good patent, they buy it or even the whole company, which owns it.
Through the popularity of the monopolist, it is likely that such a company (like Google, Amazon or Apple) can laverage a patent better, since they already have the production lines and vendors in all the countries installed.
So probably they will pay much more money to the patent owner, than what the patent owner could gain by making use from the patent.
But as a result we have an economy, where only the monopolists own the key patents. Simply for their longer timepreference.
Or which entrepreneur, that works for a houndre thousand bugs a year would not take a million dollar deal, to sell a patent? Probably very few would be so bold to keep th patent.
Practicle answer now:
I would argue, that IP is a stimulant for strong resilient monopolies to survive longer. The monopolists usually have the longer timepreference. So when they see a very good patent, they buy it or even the whole company, which owns it.
Through the popularity of the monopolist, it is likely that such a company (like Google, Amazon or Apple) can laverage a patent better, since they already have the production lines and vendors in all the countries installed.
So probably they will pay much more money to the patent owner, than what the patent owner could gain by making use from the patent.
But as a result we have an economy, where only the monopolists own the key patents. Simply for their longer timepreference.
Or which entrepreneur, that works for a houndre thousand bugs a year would not take a million dollar deal, to sell a patent? Probably very few would be so bold to keep th patent.
1❤️1