Patents Threaten To Silence A Little Girl, Literally

[HansTWN]

Originally Posted by taustin

And if the company says, "No thanks, we're not interested"? What then? The only other option is some form of emminent domain, which is to say, take it away from them.

Is that what you're advocating?

Why would you assume that they would not be interested? Thousands of sales (probably many times more than they have ever dreamed off in the first place) AND very good publicity. What more could they want, that would definitely mean they could offer a much reduced rate over the one quoted earlier.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by HansTWN

Why would you assume that they would not be interested? Thousands of sales (probably many times more than they have ever dreamed off in the first place) AND very good publicity. What more could they want, that would definitely mean they could offer a much reduced rate over the one quoted earlier.

The high price probably reflects R&D costs rather than the costs of manufacturing the actual device. It may not be economically viable to offer it as a $50 (or whatever) iPad app; it's a very specialist market sector.

[HansTWN]

Originally Posted by HarryT

The high price probably reflects R&D costs rather than the costs of manufacturing the actual device. It may not be economically viable to offer it as a $50 (or whatever) iPad app; it's a very specialist market sector.

That was exactly what I was thinking. Now they offer it for $8000.- and perhaps expect to sell a few 100 items. Now if some government agency bought 10,000 apps for the handicapped, why not sell those for $500 (no hardware is involved) and restrict them to a special sales channel? They might still sell their regular product at the normal price.

Just a thought and some random numbers, the knock-off already cost a lot more than $50.

[Sil_liS]

Originally Posted by HarryT

The high price probably reflects R&D costs rather than the costs of manufacturing the actual device. It may not be economically viable to offer it as a $50 (or whatever) iPad app; it's a very specialist market sector.

$2,595.00:


$7,495.00:


$15,145.00:


You think that the price difference comes from R&D costs, and not from manufacturing the device or pure greed?

[HarryT]

I'm not sure what you mean by "greed"; it's the the legal responsibility of every company to act in the best interests of its shareholders - this normally means making a reasonable profit.

If these devices are, as you seem to be suggesting, overpriced, presumably another company will come in and provide a much lower-priced alternative. (Without violating this company's patents, of course.)

[Sil_liS]

Originally Posted by HarryT

If these devices are, as you seem to be suggesting, overpriced, presumably another company will come in and provide a much lower-priced alternative. (Without violating this company's patents, of course.)

The $300 app is a much lower-priced alternative. The patent dispute will be settled by the courts.

[Rizla]

Originally Posted by HarryT

I'm not sure what you mean by "greed"; it's the the legal responsibility of every company to act in the best interests of its shareholders - this normally means making a reasonable profit.

There is no such thing as a 'reasonable' profit anymore. The business paradigm is make as much as you can as quickly as you can and to hell with everyone and everything else. The directing actors have purchased the governments and are able to do what they want without restriction.

[HansTWN]

Originally Posted by Rizla

There is no such thing as a 'reasonable' profit anymore. The business paradigm is make as much as you can as quickly as you can and to hell with everyone and everything else. The directing actors have purchased the governments and are able to do what they want without restriction.

Well, why don't you define "reasonable profit" for us? This business bashing has become very fashionable, but few people consider that you have development cost, marketing cost, workers to pay, etc. And for many companies the winning products have to make up for losses of the losing products.

In this case they may be charging 15000.- per unit and still lose money. So what is reasonable?

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by HansTWN

Well, why don't you define "reasonable profit" for us? This business bashing has become very fashionable, but few people consider that you have development cost, marketing cost, workers to pay, etc. And for many companies the winning products have to make up for losses of the losing products.

Precisely. Well said.

[Sigyn]

Originally Posted by HarryT

The high price probably reflects R&D costs rather than the costs of manufacturing the actual device. It may not be economically viable to offer it as a $50 (or whatever) iPad app; it's a very specialist market sector.

*assuming* public schools aren't picking up ipads in droves. Everyone in my husband's father's family is in the public school system in some way or another, and mother just retired from there, one of my friends from college teaches elementary blah-blah-blah.

All have them have been talking about iPads in schools and I just keep saying "folks, our physical books are falling apart and the history books suck and we have NO art, music, drama, choir etc and a bunch of elementary schools just closed to save money. Where the fark are you getting money to buy iPads for *each* student?!? Where?"

That aside, those boards, both with noises and without have been around forEVER. And a see & say has a board too, at least the one my cousin [multiple disabilities] had was, not at all like the round ones. Maybe it was a spell something? All I can remember is that it had individual letters and the letter would make it's sound if she pushed it, this was before when she was somewhere between pre-verbal and another label I forget now.

I just want to give everyone who's struggled to overcome a hug, and give props to all the people helping others overcome difficulties. You are appreciated. Thank you!

[Sil_liS]

Originally Posted by HansTWN

Well, why don't you define "reasonable profit" for us? This business bashing has become very fashionable, but few people consider that you have development cost, marketing cost, workers to pay, etc. And for many companies the winning products have to make up for losses of the losing products.

In this case they may be charging 15000.- per unit and still lose money. So what is reasonable?

If it's more expensive to make and develop than most cars and all it does is make make sounds when buttons are pushed they are doing something wrong.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Sil_liS

If it's more expensive to make and develop than most cars and all it does is make make sounds when buttons are pushed they are doing something wrong.

It's a specialist product, not a mass-market consumer product like a car. Specialist products tend to be expensive, by their very nature. There is a very, very restricted market for such items, hence R&D costs have to be recouped from a relatively small number of unit sales.

[HansTWN]

Originally Posted by Sil_liS

If it's more expensive to make and develop than most cars and all it does is make make sounds when buttons are pushed they are doing something wrong.

That may well be, and if it is so then they will go belly up soon enough.

[Sil_liS]

Originally Posted by HarryT

It's a specialist product, not a mass-market consumer product like a car. Specialist products tend to be expensive, by their very nature. There is a very, very restricted market for such items, hence R&D costs have to be recouped from a relatively small number of unit sales.

The market is restricted because of the price. The price is caused by the lack of competition.

[HansTWN]

Originally Posted by Sil_liS

The market is restricted because of the price. The price is caused by the lack of competition.

Lack of competition can also be the result of the market being so small that nobody sees a realistic chance that money can be made. And if there is a patent, of course competition is being restricted. That is the purpose of awarding a patent. Rewarding companies for innovation by protecting them from competition for a set number of years. Managed prudently, most everyone benefits. Yes, in some cases people will pay more. But without patent protection those products wouldn't even exist in the first place.

I can see it in our industry. Most countries we sell in (like China) a patent is not worth the paper it is written on it (unless the patent is held by a local company with good connections). So it is a continuous race for the bottom, the only emphasis is on making everything cheaper. Reduce quality so that things are just barely good enough, in many cases not even that. Forget innovation. There hasn't been any real innovation in our field for the last 40 years, as soon as a new product comes out it is being copied down to the last screw, usually even the model name and number of the copied products are the same. So who would be stupid enough to spend money trying to innovate in a situation like that? You concentrate on keeping costs to a minimum and on squeezing your suppliers.