Channel Mike

The title isn't completely accurate. Innovation is going on. But we need to rethink our patent system. The system was invented to encourage innovation. The idea that an innovator would be guaranteed a period of time that he/she could have a monopoly on the technology goes against the ideas that competition is essential. But it was a positive development for innovation because it provided a guarantee that innovation would be protected and rewarded. It went without saying that this innovation would make it to market. That's the whole point, right?

If this is the case, why is America behind much of the Pacific rim and much of Europe in internet access speed? We invented the internet! Why aren't we leading? Why do we not have electric cars? Why can't we lead the world in stem cell technology and other biotech developments? Why can we not buy, sell, and share music and movies? Why oh why can't we even keep up in these sectors, let alone lead the world?

The patent system is allowing entrenched interests not to profit by bringing innovative ideas to market, but by allowing them to bury innovation. Communication companies are fine with the status quo because they can continue to charge around $40 per month for each household to get broadband internet access. If technologies like WiMax were deployed, the cost would drop and both speed and accessibility would rise. These communications behemoths won't even allow communities to manage their own internet access. That ought to be criminal.

The same system allows Chevron, who bought Texaco, who bought controlling interest in GM-Ovonics to bury the deep cycle NiMH battery that could be powering electric cars nationwide. This isn't a matter of profits or anti-trust or best-for-the-consumer or anything else. This is national security, for Chrissake! We're constantly keeping a military presence in the most backward and violent places on earth to protect our access to oil for our cars. And American companies own the technology to alleviate the problem. American lives and dollars are being spent for no other reason than to allow oil companies to maintain their oligopolic stranglehold on our energy use. Thank goodness for companies like Tesla motors, making an electric car independently. But if they could build a battery based on Chevron's buried technology we may already see these cars on the road. And Chevron could be charging a license for each one sold. But they would make more by selling gasoline to new car buyers than selling battery technology. This makes sense if it's just business, but it's not. This is related to pollution. This is related to greenhouse gas emissions. This is related to wars. This is related to anti-trust. This is related to all of these things before we have to stoop to the argument that it's morally and ethically wrong. Write your representatives and tell them to stop subsidizing oil companies and start subsidizing politically and environmentally responsible technology. It's the least they can do.

We ought to be leading the world in biotech, too, but we're hung up on ridiculous interpretations of moral issues. The religious right went nuts over the first forays into making test-tube babies. They provided enough heat and opposition that doctors working on reproductive technology were harassed, fired, and had their work stolen and destroyed. Now, our same religious right uses these technologies to help them to conceive when God caused them to be infertile. Nice job. The same group is fighting against stem cell research in this country. Once private interests from other countries are able to make these advances and provide treatments based on the understanding that comes from this research, I'm sure we all (right-wingers and left alike) will be happy to pay for the treatments, but that money will go overseas rather than to our own companies here in America. Nice job. At least this particular problem isn't due to entrenched commercial interests. It's due to barbaric and outdated belief systems. Perhaps worse.

The entertainment industry is also trying to salvage its own old model for its profits. I won't get into the inequalities of risk and profit of these companies and the content-creators. There really are legitimate arguments on both sides of the debate here. But the reality is that people are going to share content. Period. By the time the MPAA and RIAA and their masters lock down our computers, CD players, DVD players, game consoles, etc. to the point that people can't play anything on them, they'll be dead. Who wants a media player that can't play media? As long as it can play media, the media can be copied and shared one way or another. It's a losing battle for the content owners to lock it all down. The option is to find an acceptable level of piracy and live with it. I'll write more on this particular issue later. But the point I want to make now is that, right or wrong, fair or unfair, the way copyright holders make money is changing. Distribution channels are changing. These are facts. So stop squashing innovation and evolve your way into a successful future.

The best way to guarantee failure is to hang onto the old methods as they become obsolete. Don't fight the change, understand what's driving the change and ride it into a leadership position of the future. If you're a CEO of a content provider, research new distribution channels and figure out how to make money on performances and on recordings and on media that doesn't make you look like a dick. Because if you look like a dick, nobody will buy from you. (Just to be clear, suing your fans makes you look like a dick, even if you're in the right.) If you're the CEO of Chevron, take a look at the rising tide of public opinion against fossil fuels and greenhouse gases, petroleum especially. Take a look at the reality of carbon dioxide inputs and their effects. Take a look at the efficiencies to be gained by running cars electrically. Now, spin off a company and build electric cars. Diversify. That way, when your ship starts taking on water, you'll have another one to climb onto. And you'll also feel better when you look in the mirror. And you'll also save money on lobbying efforts. If you're a Christian and you believe in an omnipotent god, then you have to accept that whatever happens does so with his permission. Otherwise, he's not omnipotent. Buy a dictionary, then see what we can do to ensure we control what is done with new biotech rather than ensuring other countries control it instead. Innovation cannot be stopped, but it can be delayed in places while other places catch up and pass. Lets not delay innovation in this country. Lets pass laws that require patents to be used or given up. Even expensive licensing arrangements are better than flat out burial. And representatives, you represent us, the people. You're not doing a very good job of it. People, write them letters and vote them out. Most representatives are really trying to do what's right, but they're hearing from paid lobbyists about what's right for us rather than hearing from us. Get email addresses, physical addresses, and phone numbers, and let them hear what we need.