Anti-Patent “Scholars” Fail to Carry Their Burden of Proof
Last Updated on Wednesday, 30 September 2009 09:00
Written by dbhalling Wednesday, 30 September 2009 09:00 |
We know that in all areas of economics where it has been tested private property rights encourage economic activity. We also know that when the government establishes incentives, it always results in more of the incentivized activity. We also know that countries with the strongest patent laws have the most innovation and the greatest technology diffusion and vice versa those countries with weak or non-existent patent laws have little or no innovation and little technology innovation. Despite this Mr. Kinsella and the anti-patent crowd ask us to believe that patents do not follow the normal rules of economics and logic. As Thomas Paine pointed out in his book The Age of Reason, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Mr. Kinsella and the anti-patent crowd have provided no evidence that patents harm innovation.
from http://blog.mises.org/archives/010748.asp#c605473 :
“Halling appears to be either economically illiterate or dishonest. As I explained here, patents are of course monopolies. A monopoly is simply state power used to stop competition, which is one thing a patent can be used for. ”
Well, how are you enjoying discussion with your rational sepcies mates thus far?
Step back, thanks for the heads up. I am enjoying the discussion about the same as I do with an examiner under the Dudas era, who has his supervisor breathing down their neck that quality = rejection.