Now I know to keep my ideas to myself until I decide how will market it... Good to know... Because nowdays people will still your idea for their own, and will not share the profits, and I have seen this happen on many occasions. Thanks,.
Nice explanation! I'm learning all about this at uni right now, the ideas are all pretty much the same in Australia (a few name changes here and there)..
So if I have an idea for say an App or even a program I of course couldn't market it without somehow making it my own, else they would just refuse to buy and then make it themselves, so would I patent it? Or is there another way to do this...?
what if a student finds out that a university professor forcifully took a students idea and creation and makes money by selling it to a major corporation? Like Chevrolet?
If you're a patent or trademark attorney reading this, then we are Fellows and Associates and we provide job opportunities in the IP sector! Get in touch and we can help you make that move!
Oh, you seem to be confused. Allow me to clear up any misunderstanding you have: "Intellectual property" doesn't exist. Private property is a physical good. By definition a good has scarcity. If it's not scarce, it's not a good. Something that's infinitely replicable is not scarce. (e.g. two people can't use the same spoon to mix cake batter at once, but can both use the same recipe.) "Intellectual property" translates to "YOU MAY NOT ARRANGE YOUR PROPERTY IN A WAY THAT LOOKS LIKE THE WAY I ARRANGED MY PROPERTY!" Furthermore, it stifles innovation. It's continually when a patent or copyright expires that a large amount of innovation takes place in a field. For an example, 3D printing has actually been around for decades, but it was only when the patent expired in the 1990s that real innovation started. It's only been since then that new methods like stereolithography have arisen, leading to the ubiquity of cheap, highly detailed 3D printing in a variety of materials that exists today, even at the consumer level. And you might say: "But if there was no Intellectual property, artists wouldn't make enough money off their work and less art would exist" The assumption here, is that by magnifying the rewards you increase the marginal output amount, which isn't true as the rewards involve restricting output of similar types of the original inventors products from being improved upon. Magnifying its profit output isn't going to increase the marginal amount produced nor consumed. Even without first-to-market advantage there are incentives that don't require use of force to prevent innovation. In which case, cheaper methods of production would be more sought after and researched. An example of this is what happened with data transfer. Telephone poles where originally made with copper wiring to transfer the data from point A to point B, this got so expensive it forced the market to find a substitute in fiber optics, which is made with sand and is inexpensive to produce. It was also a more efficient and reliable approach to transferring data than copper. "But how would I make money?" Name your price. According to models of game theory, this is actually the most efficient method for gaining profit off of things like open source software or music. "But then wouldn't everyone just put in "$0"? Yep, people also pirate. No matter what you do you're not going to stop that. But with name your price, you gain a higher profit margin than with a fixed price from a sort of self-price discrimination from people with disposable incomes or genuine interest in your product.
A poem, spoken or written, is scarce until people start copying it just like a spoon is scarce until people start copying it. People can use the same poem for a thousand different speeches or dissertations that occur simultaneously. If I know some ass who's more powerful than me can take MY idea and the work I did to make that idea come to fruition for the purpose of making a living for myself, that sure will prevent me from wanting to innovate. At the very least, it will prevent me from communicating my ideas and plans in the most productive way. I'd assume a lot of people feel the same way. "No matter what you do you're not going to stop that." -- yeah, you're not going to stop ANY abusive, irresponsible, illegal, criminal, immoral behavior no matter what you do. That's not an argument. You think IP stifles faster innovation? Let's suppose that true. So what? It's not a god worth worshipping.
This is an excellent reminder for all of us in business and in "development".
good insight and very well explained thanks a lot!
Now I know to keep my ideas to myself until I decide how will market it... Good to know... Because nowdays people will still your idea for their own, and will not share the profits, and I have seen this happen on many occasions. Thanks,.
Thanks for help on homework!
Nice explanation! I'm learning all about this at uni right now, the ideas are all pretty much the same in Australia (a few name changes here and there)..
very well explained thanks a lot!
Amazing video thank you
Well, good explanation, money is nice to know.
Valuable info, thanks
Thank you so much
Regards
Gaven Malope
South Africa / Sandton
Valuable info that i think i might need soon.
Thank you!
Nice information
What if I put my idea on creative writers vault as a copyright?
thanks lady. :)
Screw IP! Ideas and information should not be property!
+John Anonymous Ideas are bulletproof. irrelevant but still haha
Your Right why should I care.
Your explanation is very good ..
You looking so cute specially your both side pimples r attractive ❤️
So if I have an idea for say an App or even a program I of course couldn't market it without somehow making it my own, else they would just refuse to buy and then make it themselves, so would I patent it? Or is there another way to do this...?
Valuable.....understand. That's if someone doesn't take it from you.
what if a student finds out that a university professor forcifully took a students idea and creation and makes money by selling it to a major corporation? Like Chevrolet?
Hey, I'm CURIOUS, are fictional characters in TV shows and motion pictures considered as 'intellectual property'? What about characters in books?
that's why a lot of good tv shows get cancelled
What if the trade secret is how you rank highest in the competition just doing the opposite ….the trade secret is gross
Sell it quietly.
Then use the funds to get your patent!
Jamiel Cotman is
oh my God she is so cute. Thank you very much honey.
If you're a patent or trademark attorney reading this, then we are Fellows and Associates and we provide job opportunities in the IP sector! Get in touch and we can help you make that move!
Brawn hair 😀
Oh, you seem to be confused. Allow me to clear up any misunderstanding you have:
"Intellectual property" doesn't exist.
Private property is a physical good. By definition a good has scarcity. If it's not scarce, it's not a good. Something that's infinitely replicable is not scarce. (e.g. two people can't use the same spoon to mix cake batter at once, but can both use the same recipe.)
"Intellectual property" translates to "YOU MAY NOT ARRANGE YOUR PROPERTY IN A WAY THAT LOOKS LIKE THE WAY I ARRANGED MY PROPERTY!"
Furthermore, it stifles innovation.
It's continually when a patent or copyright expires that a large amount of innovation takes place in a field. For an example, 3D printing has actually been around for decades, but it was only when the patent expired in the 1990s that real innovation started. It's only been since then that new methods like stereolithography have arisen, leading to the ubiquity of cheap, highly detailed 3D printing in a variety of materials that exists today, even at the consumer level.
And you might say:
"But if there was no Intellectual property, artists wouldn't make enough money off their work and less art would exist"
The assumption here, is that by magnifying the rewards you increase the marginal output amount, which isn't true as the rewards involve restricting output of similar types of the original inventors products from being improved upon. Magnifying its profit output isn't going to increase the marginal amount produced nor consumed. Even without first-to-market advantage there are incentives that don't require use of force to prevent innovation. In which case, cheaper methods of production would be more sought after and researched.
An example of this is what happened with data transfer. Telephone poles where originally made with copper wiring to transfer the data from point A to point B, this got so expensive it forced the market to find a substitute in fiber optics, which is made with sand and is inexpensive to produce. It was also a more efficient and reliable approach to transferring data than copper.
"But how would I make money?"
Name your price. According to models of game theory, this is actually the most efficient method for gaining profit off of things like open source software or music.
"But then wouldn't everyone just put in "$0"?
Yep, people also pirate. No matter what you do you're not going to stop that. But with name your price, you gain a higher profit margin than with a fixed price from a sort of self-price discrimination from people with disposable incomes or genuine interest in your product.
A poem, spoken or written, is scarce until people start copying it just like a spoon is scarce until people start copying it. People can use the same poem for a thousand different speeches or dissertations that occur simultaneously. If I know some ass who's more powerful than me can take MY idea and the work I did to make that idea come to fruition for the purpose of making a living for myself, that sure will prevent me from wanting to innovate. At the very least, it will prevent me from communicating my ideas and plans in the most productive way. I'd assume a lot of people feel the same way.
"No matter what you do you're not going to stop that." -- yeah, you're not going to stop ANY abusive, irresponsible, illegal, criminal, immoral behavior no matter what you do. That's not an argument.
You think IP stifles faster innovation? Let's suppose that true. So what? It's not a god worth worshipping.
Your comment would be a good addition to this video:
czcams.com/video/TWYHmkmctb8/video.html
This is what Trump is going insane over! And Chiinaaaaa!
Intellectual property laws are such a joke...
sorry but eh... coca cola have no good will.