I’ve written about it before, how the patent process is fast approaching spam levels. We now have offensive patents (offensive in more ways than intended), defensive patents, speculative patents, frivolous patents, even downright fraudulent ones. The New Scientist informed me that: 100 patents are issued by the US Patent and Trademark Office every working hour, … Continue reading “Taking action against Patent Spam”
There’s a story in the feedback section of the latest New Scientist about a “lazy inventor trap”; it restored my faith in the stupidity of much of today’s patent processes. No surprise, the story’s hidden behind a paywall. Why worry when you’ve got Google. I entered the patent application number and there it was. You … Continue reading “Patently bogus”
Paul Cox commented on a recent post of mine, where I cited The Openness Aversion. Here’s Paul’s comment: Its easy to belittle the owners of intelectual property in the manner that you do. I doubt your readers would agree with you if they had earned valuable intelectual property. It would be my experience that the … Continue reading “Asterix, the sky is falling on my head”
Introduction Last week I spent some time looking at the Social Enterprise through the lens of The Big Shift. Responses, in terms of comments, suggestions, retweets, Likes and +1s were heartening, and I am grateful. Thank you. Today I’m going to continue with that perspective, this time drilling down into the subject of collaboration. A … Continue reading “On Collaboration”
I have often wondered why we spend so much time wrestling with the issues related to Marketing in the 21st Century, with reframing IPR and DRM, and with “net neutrality“. Why we land up with starkly polarised views and start calling each other names. Blefuscu and Lilliput all over again. And recently, I’ve begun to … Continue reading “The Because Effect and the future of Marketing and IPR and maybe even the Net”