Comparing the Interstate to stealing patents in order to price fix is asinine.
But you already know that.
1 Like
I stopped reading at imamate.
Here are the precedents for seizing patents under eminent domain per ChatGPT:
" The concept of seizing patents under eminent domain is relatively rare, but there are precedents in U.S. law where patents were effectively seized or used by the government under the power of eminent domain. The legal framework for this comes from both statutory provisions and court decisions:
1. Statutory Basis:
- 28 U.S.C. § 1498: This is the most direct statutory basis for the government’s ability to use patented inventions. Under this statute, when the government uses a patented invention without the patent holder’s permission, the patent holder’s only recourse is to seek compensation in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims. The statute essentially gives the government the right to “take” a patent under eminent domain, with the requirement that the patent holder be paid “reasonable and entire compensation.”
2. Case Law Precedents:
- Crozier v. Fried. Krupp Aktiengesellschaft, 224 U.S. 290 (1912): This Supreme Court case affirmed the U.S. government’s ability to use a patent without the patentee’s consent, provided that the patent holder is compensated under 28 U.S.C. § 1498. The case involved the U.S. government’s use of a patented gun carriage design during military procurement.
- De Graffenried v. United States, 29 Fed. Cl. 384 (1993): This case further affirmed the government’s right under 28 U.S.C. § 1498 to use patented inventions and pay the patent holder for the use. It involved the government’s use of a patented process related to waste disposal.
3. World War II Era Seizures:
- During World War II, the U.S. government, under the auspices of national security, seized numerous patents, particularly those owned by German and Japanese companies, under the Trading with the Enemy Act. Although not strictly eminent domain, these actions were similar in nature, where the government took control of intellectual property for public use during the war effort.
4. Post-9/11 Context:
- After 9/11, there were discussions about the government potentially seizing patents related to essential technologies, such as anthrax vaccines, under eminent domain if necessary to ensure public access. Though this was not widely executed, it showed the continuing relevance of the concept.
These precedents highlight how the government has the authority to “seize” patents under eminent domain, provided that fair compensation is made to the patent holder."
ChatGPT describes the legal procedure as follows:
" 1. Government Use of the Patent:
- The U.S. government or its contractors may use or manufacture an invention that is protected by a patent without the patent holder’s consent. This can occur in situations where the government deems the invention necessary for public use, such as in national defense, public health, or other critical areas.
2. Notification to the Patent Holder:
- There is generally no requirement for the government to notify the patent holder before using the patented invention. The patent holder may learn of the use through other means, such as discovering that the government is employing their invention.
3. Filing a Claim for Compensation:
- Once the patent holder becomes aware of the government’s use of their patented invention, they can file a claim for compensation in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims. The patent holder does not have the right to stop the government’s use of the invention; their remedy is solely monetary compensation.
4. Determination of “Reasonable and Entire Compensation”:
- The Court of Federal Claims will determine the amount of compensation due to the patent holder. The compensation is intended to be “reasonable and entire,” which typically means the fair market value of the use of the patent. The court may consider various factors, including licensing fees, the value of the patent, the extent of the government’s use, and any precedent for similar cases.
5. Payment of Compensation:
- After the court determines the amount of compensation, the government pays the patent holder. This payment is meant to fully compensate the patent holder for the government’s use of the patented invention.
6. Potential Appeals:
- If the patent holder disagrees with the court’s determination of compensation, they may appeal the decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The government also has the right to appeal if it believes the compensation determined by the Court of Federal Claims is excessive.
7. Final Resolution:
- Once all appeals are resolved, the court’s decision is final, and the compensation is paid to the patent holder. The government can continue to use the patented invention as necessary.
Summary:
The process is designed to balance the government’s need to use patented technology for public purposes with the patent holder’s right to fair compensation. It reflects the government’s eminent domain powers extended to intellectual property, ensuring that patent holders are compensated when their patents are used without consent."
Note that the patent holder receives compensation and if there is a dispute as to value that dispute can be resolved through litigation.
Posting ChatGPT 47 fucking times has to be the silliest argument for communism I have ever witnessed!!
2 Likes
Agreed. It doesn’t take any effort whatsoever to regurgitate ChatGPT. If we want to look it up then we will do it ourselves. Come up with some original thoughts and post those.
I have never advocated the procedure.
I just Chatgpt to explain how it works and has been used in the past.
If you believe that I advocated it please cite the post containing the advocation.
Considering ChatGPT will flat out lie. Yeah
You compared stealing patents to building the interstate highway
The patents were taken through legal procedures.
That isnt what the original discussion was.
That doesn’t change the fact that The patents were taken through a legal procedure controlled by the court subject to appeal and the owners of the patents were compensated.
The compensation can be set by either direct negotiation or by ruling of the court.
By the way, if Harris tries to use imminent domain to seize tariffs the government may use some of the cases I cited as precidents.
None of the cases you cited were because the patent holder was making too much money.
I understood why the government has the right to use eminent domain to obtain private property for a public usage such as building roads
However I don’t understand why the government would have the right to seize a patent just because a business owner did not agree to comply to price controls from a president who thinks they are a dictator A patent is intellectual property and it is a crime to steal intellectual property
It is up to the courts to decide if the use of eminent domain is justified or not.
If the court finds that the use is justified then it is by legal definition not a theft because it the result of a judgement. The judgement is subject to appeal and the patent owner is compensated for the value of the property taken.
The amount of the compensation may be by negotiation or by the judgement of the court after the appeals are exhausted.
Never said they did.
Any citations for that.
ChatGPT may be wrong on a given subject but lying implies a will decision which is a human charistic lacking in artificial intelligence.
Lying is intentionally telling false information. Yes AI lies.
Good citations @Wintermute.
Any evidence that the information that I posted is either a lie or incorrect?
I’m not going to spend the time to fact check your chat gpt.
I don’t like ai answers. They’re often have bad information in them.
Does recklessness count
My take is Kamala intends to seize the means / modes of production? Kamala using price controls after seeing how they can cause shortages is an aggressive attempt to implement her agenda and she is feigning ignorance to her gullible followers