By "rent-seekers" you mean organizations that have spent billions of dollars to research and prove the tech? As the current top comment represents, if company A spends billions of dollars creating a technology, then company B steals it, company B can sell it for less because they don't have to pay the R&D overhead. Company A falters or dies. The company that actually knew how to advance the field and create new tech suffered. Is that good for the world?
The way it is supposed to work is, company A researches a tech, company b also researches a tech, the best one wins (or more likely they split the market), the competition induces more advances, and eventually the old tech becomes cheap (or free) and widely available as it is supplanted by even newer, better tech.
And yea I know our patent system is broken, etc. But I don't understand how you can have a general principle that the people who created something don't have the right to benefit off of it.
The way it is supposed to work is, company A researches a tech, company b also researches a tech, the best one wins (or more likely they split the market), the competition induces more advances, and eventually the old tech becomes cheap (or free) and widely available as it is supplanted by even newer, better tech.
And yea I know our patent system is broken, etc. But I don't understand how you can have a general principle that the people who created something don't have the right to benefit off of it.