Lava Lamps patent-free too?

A sidebar in today’s Chicago Tribune certainly implies that, like Coca-Cola, lava lamps are manufactured without patent protection, but as a trade secret.  Invented in 1963, the lava lamp’s patent would long since have expired (tho lawyers seem to know ways to effectively extend such things).

btw, the manufacturer says it isn’t officially called a “lava lamp,” but rather a “Lava brand motion lamp.”

Slashdot discussion on IP

The general issue of “Intellectual ‘Property’” was raised today on Slashdot, and the ensuing discussion makes just about all the important points. Most people accept some sort of IP, but length of protection, especially for copyrights, is too long. Some question whether IP is legitimate at all; others point out that patents do require holders to provide details of their inventions, thus preventing long-term trade secrets. And there’s a link to what seems to be a fine book Against Intellectual Property, which can be purchased in hardcopy or downloaded free.

Magicians protect intellectual property without law

Magicians’ secrets really can’t be effectively copyrighted or patented, and trade secret law is of limited use, so how have professional magicians been able to keep most of their best tricks pretty much secret from the public? It’s by a set of strongly-enforced “common norms” among the profession, which allows “sharing” among those in the trade, but prohibits revealing more than trivial secrets. Violators are punished by expulsion from magicians’ organizations, and other techniques which make it difficult to continue working in the field.

From Jacob Loshin’s Secrets Revealed: How Magicians Protect Intellectual Property Without Law (pdf), via boingboing.

“Intellectual Property” vs. Future Archaeologists

There’s already a lot of old digital files that no one can read.  And “Digital Rights Management” limitations will make future archaeologists’ tasks even more difficult.  So says Phil Zimmerman, the inventor of PGP encryption.

“I think intellectual property law has gone a little bit crazy and is counter-productive for society,” says Zimmermann, referring to masses of archives of film that needs to be moved to modern media before it degrades completely. “You need to transfer it but the copyright holder is dead, and no-one knows how to contact the estate.

GAO on “IP” and drug innovation

Speaking here of drugs Congress likes– patented pharmaceuticals– the GAO says:

Intellectual property protections are designed to help encourage innovation by providing financial incentives to engage in research and development efforts.

but, according to some experts interviewed by GAO

intellectual property protections enable companies to earn significant profits while reducing the incentive to develop more innovative drugs.

Nothing really new here. GAO wasn’t asked to provide any recommendations.  Full report is here.

“Intellectual Property” abuse…

…can have fatal results. Another example occurred in Chicago Friday, when a man who apparently expected great wealth to result from his idea decided he’d been ripped off by his patent lawyer. The AP article implies that the “idea” wasn’t worth much, but wouldn’t disasters like this be avoided if nobody expected to become wealthy just by monopolizing an idea?