Chuckro and Edgehopper, this is for you

[jethrien]

http://lawandthemultiverse.com/

Superheroes, supervillians, and the law.

"If there’s one thing comic book nerds like doing it’s over-thinking the smallest details. Here we turn our attention to the hypothetical legal ramifications of comic book tropes, characters, and powers. Just a few examples: Are mutants a protected class? Who foots the bill when a hero damages property while fighting a villain? What happens legally when a character comes back from the dead?"

Comments

[cubby-t-bear.livejournal.com]

This would tend to suggest that we should only give patents where the societal benefit from removing all the needless duplication of research exceeds the penalty of giving somebody a monopoly on a useful idea or device.

At the extremes, if this is something a grad student can figure out in 3 days with an internet connection and a $1200k/month stipend, it shouldn't be patentable, but if it takes a research team 10 years at $100M development costs, we should

[cubby-t-bear.livejournal.com]

Please read that last sentence as if an ? were appended.

[cubby-t-bear.livejournal.com]

Also, remove the k from the grad student stipend. Or read it as 1.2k. Gah. Typos.

[edgehopper.livejournal.com]

Well, yes. That's supposed to be what the nonobviousness requirement in patent law does, but good luck getting judges and patent examiners to apply it in the optimal way for public policy.