Talk:Soft IP

This is a useful article
As a wikipedia user, I was pleased to find this article, and the useful information it includes. So I don't agree with the critical notes in the heading.

One should acknowledge that "Soft IP" is just a proposal. While it is (still) pretty academic, it does play a role in the debate about patents, and allegations that patents are actually more harmful than helpful to the economy because they facilitate "patent wars". The (nearly) unconditional right of injuction (presently still) associated with patents is perceived as a major problem - that "Soft IP" could address, especially after the US Supreme Court in eBay v. Mercantil has decided that there are few exception to the (present) right of injunction. Rbakels (talk) 08:14, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

IBM
I thought that IBM was/is a strong supporter and promoter of Soft-IP? But IBM is not mentioned. No, I am not advocating a free advertisement. A critical note might be that firms like IBM that use their patents primarily as an additional source of revenue (as an investment, so to say) would benefit more from "Soft IP" than firms that depend on the exclusivity of patents for their business model. Soft-IP would silence patent critics and help firms like IBM to secure their patent licence fee income stream. Rbakels (talk) 08:19, 8 April 2011 (UTC)