Patent Reform Bill Unable To Clean Up Patent Mess 92
First to submit writes "Ars Technica analyzes the Patent Reform Act that has passed the House and is being debated in the Senate. Unfortunately for those longing for real, meaningful patent reform, the bill comes up short in some significant ways. 'Despite the heated rhetoric on both sides, it is unclear if the legislation will do much to fix the most serious flaws in the patent system. A series of appeals court rulings in the 1990s greatly expanded patentable subject matter, making patents on software, business methods, and other abstract concepts unambiguously legal for the first time.'"
Re:Humpty Dumpty Patent Reform (Score:3, Interesting)
It's a step in the right direction rather than a complete fix.
Comment removed (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Its just about control. (Score:3, Interesting)
Translation: we will never see useful patent reform because it is not in the best interests of the entrenched powers. You're probably right, unfortunately. That's why representative democracy doesn't work. If you really want to remove the tyranny of the aristocracy, there's only one way to do it: a direct democracy. Of course, then you get the tyranny of the majority. Not sure which is worse. Either way, a significant percentage of people get screwed.
The only form of government that really prevents tyranny, ironically, is a benevolent dictatorship by someone who is not only incorruptible, but also both intelligent and caring. Of course, reliably finding such a dictator has proven difficult; throughout all of this planet's history, there have only been maybe two or three who meet even those three basic criteria... and therein lies the fundamental problem: people are still subject to their animal nature to some degree, as much as we would like to believe otherwise.
I'd honestly kind of like to create a government based on the "tyranny of the informed"---a direct democracy in which everyone votes every Saturday. At the beginning of the day, everyone gets to see a list of issues and what time their debates and voting will be held electronically via web browsers. People interested in that issue will vote on it and people uninterested will not. For the most part, this will tend to largely create a voting pool that is self-selecting for the most competent people to decide on a given issue. It will also largely negate the effect of political parties since the role of the representatives will not be making the decisions themselves.
The basic design is as follows: during the week, the representatives caucus and agree on which fifteen issues will be presented for a given Saturday vote. They decide who will speak for each side of each of the debate. Each side will have fifteen minutes to divide among their members. Each side uses that time to present the issue from their perspective. The public votes for ten minutes. Then, the next issue is presented, and so on. If there are more than two options (e.g. choose option A, option B, or neither), then there may be more than two positions. If there are a lot of these, you might end up having to tackle fewer issues that week to keep the total time under twelve hours, but the basic principle still applies.
In addition to the self selection, voters should also be required to show an awareness of all sides of each issue. Representatives of each side of the issue would write ten questions to determine whether or not a given voter understands every side of the issues. The questions must have a provably factual answer, though they may include questions about one side's opinion, e.g. "The Pro side believes that this DHMO legislation is a good idea because A. water is bad for you, B. they were bought off by Coca-Cola, C. they are opposed to the salt industry." They may not attempt to present opinion as fact, and either side may contest a question on these grounds, in which case a 2/3rds majority vote of the representatives is needed for the question to be allowed on the ballot. In a private session on Friday, these details will be hammered out and voted upon by the representatives. The three questions from each side with the greatest amount of support will be included on the ballot.
Any vote from a voter who gets fewer than 70% correct answers on these questions will not be counted. This will exclude the votes of people who lack enough of a fundamental understanding of the issues to make an informed decision. More to the point, however, this will also discourage grandstanding and encourage the representatives to inform the voters about the relevant facts that support their position. If they fail to adequately present those facts during their speeches, voters who might side with their position will not g