The article I chose is relevant to our course discussion
about “borrowing” ideas from inventors. The article is about how Amazon is
taking the business from Square, both are tiny credit card swipes inserted into
a smart device. To me, the concept of inventors VS exploiters falls under the
category of necessary evil. It is not, in the classic sense, fair to the
inventor that another could take credit and fortune from a product he did not
create. However, it is imperative to have competition in order to drive down
prices for consumers. If there was just one company selling smart phones, just
one selling computers, and just one selling software, the prices would be
astronomically higher and the development would be exponentially slower. By
having multiple companies constantly competing for sales, consumers receive
cheaper and better products than they would with fewer companies; because of
competition, consumers and the advancement of technology benefit.
I agree, and you make a great point. No intellectual property is being stolen (Amazon is not pretending to be Square), and I guess Square didn't have a patent. Patents protect the first-time inventors, but they expire to protect the technology growth and consumers.
ReplyDelete