Coffeehouse Post

Single Post Permalink

View Thread: Job's vendetta to pull Galaxy S III from shelves?
  • User profile image

    , Maddus Mattus wrote

    For instance, Android devices could be cheaper and of better quality if they didnt have to pay Microsoft. Same with drugs, if a pharmacutical doesnt have to pay lawyers, it can put the resources to better use, R&D for instance. Companies are constantly in search in improving their efficiency, meaning adding value for customers and reducing overhead costs, patents are a clearly overhead costs.

    Sorry, I haven't read most of the preceding discussion so what I'm about to say may be completely irrelevant, but:

    If pharma companies (for instance) didn't have access to patents they could spend millions or billions (depending on currency and drug) bringing a drug to market - doing R&D, clinical trials, accounting for costs for potential drugs that never made it through - only to have the final product, the fruits of that investment, manufactured for next to nothing by generics manufacturers with no R&D overhead. No patents = No innovation.

    On a related note, I came accross this, which I think can be described as utter madness: