Here is a development that was bound to happen: OPEN SOURCE–as in free ideas, not free beer–comes to the patent world. The LegalForce IP Marketplace is first and foremost a fascinating place to look for ideas. What is does is make the patent database, which has always been open, easy to use and relevant. It does this by providing a way for inventors to bring inventions to our attention that they think are relevant to society today–and this potentially valuable to a buyer or licensor.
LegalForce provides an easy interface. LegalForce provides motivation by adding e-commerce. Heck, even if you are not in the market for buying or licensing a patent, it is fun to shop. Kind of like looking at online real estate prices in Palo Alto.
LegalForce is revolutionary because it helps the patent system do its good work for society. LegalForce brings the benefits of “long tail” and e-commerce and easy user-interfaces to intellectual property. Again, kind of like what happened to real estate.
One thing that is interesting to consider, will there be other markets? Perhaps more specific? fun to anticipate what is going to happen!
Why is LegalForce a terrific development? Because it uses the power of the open web marketplace to enable the original pro-social and open intent of the patent system:
The original idea of patents was
1. Innovation is hurt by secrecy, and helped by publication.
a. It is good for innovation in society if idea people to share ideas rather than keep ideas bound up in trade secrets. Shared ideas can be discussed, considered, improved upon, and worked-around. All this is good for society.
b. The patent idea was in contrast to the guild system, where those with ideas kept them secret. Ideas such as the formula for portland cement (patented in the 1800s in England, and now widely available), and the formula for varnish on violins (lost with Stradivarius’ apprentices) were better off shared.
2. Innovation is helped by paying inventors, and hurt by rewarding companies that steal idesas.
a. It is good for society if people who have inventions and share them can get paid to do this. They will then be able to quit their day jobs and make more ideas. People should be able to sell their ideas to others (like selling land on which to build a house), to license the use of their ideas (like leasing land or giving an “easement” to use or cross a piece of land), and people should be able to license the use of their ideas to many people, if they like, and they should be free, as in Creative Commons licenses for songs, to offer licenses for different uses at different prices–such as free for non-commercial use while charging for commercial use.
b. Society must protect individual inventors and others from having their inventions stolen by others, and must punish invention stealers. In particular, large companies with almost unlimited budgets–such as today’s Intel, IBM, Microsoft and so on, were seen as most likely to steal ideas. This is because their money, manufacturing, distribution, and lock-in with customers would give them tremendous advantages over individuals in bringing an idea to market. Thus inventors need to be able to go to court to stop those who steal. Damages need to be assessed against companies that steal, otherwise companies will steal until caught.
3. Inventions are property. Inventions may be intangible, but they certainly are real, valuable, and made be the sweat of a person. Theft of ideas encourages secrecy. Protection of property rights for inventors encourages publication.
a. The foundation of openness is to confirm in law the inherent right people have to their own inventions, the products of their creativity and work–their inspiration and perspiration.
b. All property rights have some limits. For example, real estate property rights can be taken over by governments through a judicial process of “eminent domain” for public purposes, such as roads.
The equivalent of eminent domain for patent property rigthts is a time limit. The inventors of the patent system decide, wisely, that property right for inventions should be time-limited, unlike the property right for land. There should be a limit to how long a person has a property right to their ideas–on the order of 20 years. In this way individuals will be stimulated to make more and more ideas, rather than hang onto a particular idea.
5. We need a marketplace for patents, that is for intangible intellectual property.
a. This requires information. The patent office has long maintained an open, public, free database of inventions.
b. And it requires a publc market of the kind that can only be achieved by e-commerce. It requires a way for buyes and sellers to freely assemble. A market focuses attention on inventions that are likely to be valuable, and it brings together prospective buyers and sellers.
Up to now, big companies have made their own market. Big companies have bought and sold patents, privately and secretly.
We need to let smaller players in. What has been needed is an online service that allowed electronic commerce for inventions. This is what LealForce IP Marketplace has done, and the result is brilliant. You can go to the site and read patents! The patents you read are those that their owners think you might be interested in. That is, they are active patetents. This is a huge help, in contrast to the USPTO database that shows all patents, but has no focus other than broad topics and ranges of dates.