"""but the constitution of my nation is pretty damn clear that the whole point of the patent system is to "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts". I don't see anything in there about "protection"."""
Yes, because a one line "mission plan" summary totally summarizes the law and how it's used.
"""Patents provide protection as a means to an end. What I was saying is that the goal of the patent system is very much to get inventions into the hands of the public, and into the hands of other inventors who can improve them."""
That goal could be accomplished without the patent system altogether. Just make everything open. That would get inventions to the hands of the public and other inventors even faster.
The actual use of the patent system is to present barriers to the copying of inventions, to allow the one who come up with it to profit.
Now this is supposed to encourage R&D, and thus the party line about "advancement" etc (which is totally secondary and only comes as a side effect of patenting, whereas restriction of copying is the immediate effect).
So, yeah, Apple's attempts are against the abstract principle behind the patent office, but much in line with it's pragmatic use.
Half a world away.
"""but the constitution of my nation is pretty damn clear that the whole point of the patent system is to "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts". I don't see anything in there about "protection"."""
Yes, because a one line "mission plan" summary totally summarizes the law and how it's used.
"""Patents provide protection as a means to an end. What I was saying is that the goal of the patent system is very much to get inventions into the hands of the public, and into the hands of other inventors who can improve them."""
That goal could be accomplished without the patent system altogether. Just make everything open. That would get inventions to the hands of the public and other inventors even faster.
The actual use of the patent system is to present barriers to the copying of inventions, to allow the one who come up with it to profit.
Now this is supposed to encourage R&D, and thus the party line about "advancement" etc (which is totally secondary and only comes as a side effect of patenting, whereas restriction of copying is the immediate effect).
So, yeah, Apple's attempts are against the abstract principle behind the patent office, but much in line with it's pragmatic use.