Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and the Yahoo Answers website is now in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
What do Teabaggers think of patents?
Patents are essentially government enforced monopolies. I'm curious if the Teabaggers have an official stance on the issues of patents.
Ok. Maybe I don't understand patents correctly. One answer said that if you change a patented product enough, then the new product is not covered under the original patent (I think this is called a Derivative Work?). However, I'm fairly sure that if I examined the DNA of Round-Up Ready crops, changed the DNA, and sold it as a new product, then Monsanto would be all over my ***. In fact, I think the license for the Monsanto seeds states that you are not allowed to examine the DNA, and are not even allowed to report any thing you find by running tests and experiments on the seeds/plants.
Similarly, I can't look at Microsoft's source code, improve it, then release my own, better OS. It is against the license on Windows to even try to reverse engineer the source code.
Prescription drugs, as well as probably everything else, has these same kinds patent and license restrictions that give these companies monopolistic powers.
So, maybe it's a combination of patents, and the allowable l
Anyways, none of this has much to do with my question, which is, "what do Teabaggers think of patents." (I mean the people in political groups who call themselves Teabaggers, not the people who perform certain sexual acts.)
I'm curious because these are heavily enforced by government, and Teabaggers are for small government, (I assume).
6 Answers
- Anonymous1 decade agoFavorite Answer
What does Julio think of a border patrol agent knocking on his door?
- Anonymous1 decade ago
Teabaggers have an inborn aversion to economics. Otherwise they wouldn't risk the future of supportive foreign investment in the country by attaching a planned parenthood rider to an important economic issue. The reality of the macroeconomic effects of patents and the protection of trade rights is that it is a government regulated way to ensure competition in the areas of research and development. If patents weren't protected and enforced by the government, Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman would have little incentive to invest massive amounts of money into assuring that we have the most advanced weapons in the world (I have no positive or negative judgment about the development of weapons). This is why teabaggers can accurately claim we are number in something (defense spending).
Most of the computer technology that we have today would not have been developed so rapidly without the protection of short-term profits that are gained by holding patents. The Chinese and even American computer giants would just reverse engineer and capitalize on anything new and drive smaller computer companies out of the market leaving monopoly or oligopoly situations. As it is now Oracle shells out a 100 million or more to buy anything worth looking at.... and I think that is the American way : )
Source(s): JD in Economics. - Anonymous1 decade ago
Patents are not a monopoly.
Even a patented product may be improved or have enough design changes made to have rival products marketed.
They only protect the core invention for 11 years and the inventor is entitled to his fruits.
Why are you guys so fixated on homosexuals who engage in such activity anyhow??
Teabagging as well as other deviant behavior seems to be a fixation for you guys.
- Anonymous1 decade ago
You question is riddled with erroneous assumptions, definitions, and omissions are crucial facts. Sorry but your question is impossible to answer in an honest and intelligent manner under these conditions. And pointing out every single fallacy in your ridiculous rant requires more time and energy than I'm willing to put forth, especially since you're obviously intellectually dishonest, willfully obtuse, and will most likely just continue to play dumb.
You fail. Sorry dude.
- Anonymous1 decade ago
Protecting intellectual property is one of the reasons America is as wealthy as it is. You have far more incentive to take the painstaking steps and cost of inventing something new when your invention can't be legally ripped off immediately.
- xpatinasiaLv 71 decade ago
Even with your definition, a teabagger doesn't know the difference between a patent and a hat rack.