Patents on Movie Plots

Somebody is making an application to patent a movie plot.

I doubt this will get approved. At least I hope it won’t be granted. If it were, creativity would be stifled in exchange for law suits.

Funny to think of 13 Going On 30 as ‘prior art’.

America is stupid.

If it helps enure that this shitty movie never gets made, them I’m all for it.

Rather, it would help to ensure that only stupid movies get made. Fortunately this will never fly, as unlike software or business practice “patents”, movies are a matter which everyone is directly familiar with.

What he wants is perfectly served by copyright. His only possible motive is to prevent similar productions. Not only is there ample prior art, but this is a stupid and greedy attempt to stifle others’ creativity for personal gain.

One angle that strikes me, come to think of it, is the desire to protect himself from direct plagiarism: patents are much easier to defend than copyrights. So he is, in this view, the little guy with a business model but no access to capital in a distorted market, protecting himself from the powerful forces that actively distort the market.

Trying to abuse the legal system to protect his commercial interests from the evils of capitalism! Viva le revolution! No.

Especially when Big (the one with Tom Hanks) had pretty much the same story years earlier.

Especially when Big (the one with Tom Hanks) had pretty much the same story years earlier.[/quote]

Not exactly. In Big, there was no time in between that he couldn’t account for.

I cant seem to come up with a political or religious comment on this issue.

Yah, just what do patent and copyright law have to do with politics? ;-)

I guess I could have posted it in movies. But really, the reason I placed it in here is “politics”. I don’t think anybody would have tried this if the U.S. Patent Office hadn’t started granting patents for software, and business processes, e.g. Amazon’s one click checkout patent.

Now that the USPTO is accepting that, it’s time to push the envelope further in the eyes of this guy.

I always was under the misapprehension that copyright and patents were something that provided protection for the authors of creative works and inventions for a limited time, and thus provided an incentive for the advancement of art and science. But instead, the copyright and patent system is an impediment.

Patents are routinely bought up by companies who do so just to “enforce” their IP rights. What it usually means is threatending letters to companies and engaging in litigation, and not in the advancement of science and technology.

Copyrights and their enforcement are hindering the arts. For an example, check out the difficlulties in clearing copyright in Mad Hot Ballroom

This is just a stunt to get attention for the script itself.

I think you’ve sussed it…