http://mathewingram.disqus.com/enThu, 24 Aug 2006 13:48:20 -0000http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2006/08/23/getting-creative-with-the-patent-system/#comment-1294737Thanks for the comment, Jim. I am definitely in favour of patents, and there's no question that they help smaller companies level the playing field with larger ones. But don't you think there was some level of "obviousness" about the navigation scheme that Creative patented? Just curious.Mathew IngramThu, 24 Aug 2006 13:48:20 -0000http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2006/08/23/getting-creative-with-the-patent-system/#comment-1294735Invention should be protected. In my view it is a social good for creative people to generate ideas. It is a social good for folks to publicize these ideas, so that others may learn from them and innovate on top of them or around them. The patent system requires publication of ideas years before patents are issued. Creative did in fact create/invent the control before Apple. Apple without a doubt was able to read the Creative patents before working on the iPod. <br><br>When Apple met with Creative to explore collaboration--what protection did Creative have against being ripped off by Apple? None. <br><br>Without patent protecton independent inventors and small companies are totally at the mercy of larger companies who steal their ideas and bring them to market. Apple the "innovator" has brought to market technology ideas from Xerox Parc in the Mac, from Carnegie Mellon University in the OS, and from Creative Labs and from Dave Winer and others to do the iTunes/iPod/Podcasting combination.<br><br>Large companies almost always have tremendous advantages over independent inventors when it comes to commercialization. These include finanical resources, organizational capabilities, distribution networks, and the ability to achieve scale quickly.jim mooreThu, 24 Aug 2006 13:36:23 -0000