On Wed, 11 Jul 2012 22:26:50 -0400, Bill wrote:

wrote:
On Wed, 11 Jul 2012 21:50:57 -0400, Bill wrote:

zzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On 12 Jul 2012 01:06:38 GMT, Han wrote:

"HeyBub" wrote in
m:

Han wrote:

I believe that in the case where an invention becomes a monopoly,
that the inventor is obliged to license his invention at "reasonable"
cost, not an exorbitant cost. My hyperbolic statements were meant to
emphasize the reasonableness of the fees. As for taking, there is
also eminent domain - much maligned, often improperly practiced, but
such "takings" are allowed by the Constitution.

Meh!

ALL patents are monopolies, guaranteed by the Constitution.

Article I, Section 8

"The Congress shall have the power... To promote the Progress of
Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and
Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and
Discoveries;..."

And? If a law makes use of a patent mandatory, licensing fees shall be
reasonable it says somewhere IIRC. Wasn't that the case with telephone
fees, and a host of other things?

The telephone companies were/are regulated monopolies.

Totally different animals.


So are newspaper publishers, record companies, and American car makers.

Make sense, please.

Due to VoIP, Skype, etc.. telephone companies aren't what they used to
be. They have been impacted by a host of other factors which make them a
poor example of a regulated monopoly to use as a reference point.

....and your point is?