There is a happy balance to be had here. Patents as they exist today is often hindering innovation rather than promoting it. E.g. 3D printing really took off when 3D printing patents started expiring. The industry was stuck while patents where enforceable.

In many industries patents are an innovation blocker. Companies often spend more money fighting patents trolls than they gain form having patents. Patens are increasingly acquired for defensive purpose to defend against patent troll attacks rather than actually protecting any innovation.

I am not against intellectual property protection, but I think how things have developed in the US in particular is excessive and counterproductive.

Exactly. Like solar panels. It existed for decades, and languished in the labs, behind patent protections, until the patents expired. Then China came onto the scene, and innovated in mass production techniques to make it cheaper.

And now, solar energy just crossed a milestone, at 4 cents per kilowatt hour, making it competitive with other energy sectors.

> less funding and more valueless throwaway products

Everything is derivative.

Even the latest generation of CPU technology pushing faster clock rates and adding more cores. It’s still derivative of the initial idea of the transistor.

You build value by building a moat. You make your business more valuable by making it harder for others to get into, almost like a natural monopoly.

Like consumer automobiles, which require a huge investment in societal knowledge and capability. Only a few countries can mass produce cars at a commercial level. Or commercial airplanes, where only a few companies can really make a profit. Or even Tesla, by changing the paradigm, from internal combustion engines, to fully electric drivetrains.

My initial comment was only to rebut the idea that you can’t do anything without massive amounts of patents and copyrights. Which in itself, has gone too far.

This is true for a lot of important drugs that don't have massively lucrative markets to recover their investment. This means fewer new antibiotics for global issues and more penis pills.

> fewer new antibiotics

So companies don’t do this, because there is no profit in it? Perhaps, that is the problem with late stage capitalism itself? Everyone wants to become a rent-seeking landlord.

What about a societal need? What about for the survival of the human race?

This is like arguing that humanity can’t muster up the ingenuity to solve something to save the human race, just because there’s no profit in it.

Necessity is the mother of all invention. If there are fewer antibiotics, then maybe this just means that it is not necessary.

Sorry folks! You’re just going to have to take your chances with the Grim Reaper! My bank account can’t be bothered to find a cure for you.