Winning the Hardware Software Game Winning the Hardware-Software Game - 2nd Edition

Using Game Theory to Optimize the Pace of New Technology Adoption
  • How do you encourage speedier adoption of your product or service?
  • How do you increase the value your product or service creates for your customers?
  • How do you extract more of the value created by your product or service for yourself?


Latest Comments

  • Anonymous said More
    Great explanation for the relationship... 4 days ago.
  • Anonymous said More
    nice analysis, thanks Wednesday, 21 October 2020
  • Anonymous said More
    The fact that CBD from marijuana is... Sunday, 14 June 2020
  • Anonymous said More
    This was excellent and extremely... Tuesday, 21 April 2020
  • Anonymous said More
    Well written. Well constructed. Tuesday, 13 August 2019

A recent article in the NYT, “On Tyson’s Face, It’s Art. On Film, a Legal Issue” by Noam Cohen, discusses the uncertainty that exists regarding the interpretation of many Federal laws, copyright laws in this case, especially when the jurisdiction of the laws creep into unchartered territory:


In “The Hangover Part II,” the sequel to the very successful what-happened-last-night comedy, the character played by Ed Helms wakes up with a permanent tattoo bracketing his left eye. The Maori-inspired design is instantly recognizable as the one sported by the boxer Mike Tyson …

…S. Victor Whitmill … designed the tattoo for Mr. Tyson, called it “tribal tattoo,” and claims it as a copyrighted work.

He has gone to Federal District Court in St. Louis to ask a judge to stop Warner Brothers Entertainment from using the tattoo in its posters or in the movie… as well as to demand monetary damages for what he calls “reckless copyright infringement” by the studio…

The suit isn’t frivolous, however, legal experts say. They contend the case could offer the first rulings on tricky questions about how far the rights of the copyright holder extend in creations that are, after all, on someone else’s body. They are questions likely to crop up more often as it becomes more common for actors or athletes to have tattoos and as tattoo designs become more sophisticated.

Unfortunately, the lawsuit will probably not resolve much uncertainty for the general public, since the high costs of litigation will likely lead the parties to settle out of court, according to an expert on copyright law who was questioned in the article.

The issue I’m grappling with here is the following.

  • The laws as they are written are often unclear.

There is a general trade-off of time and money resources between

•  Drafting laws that apply to general principals, and

•  Drafting laws that are able to anticipate and address all the issues that might arise.

Presumably, Congress reaches a balance by making laws that tilt more towards general principles, and then letting the courts clarify controversies that arise over the application of the laws to specific circumstances.

  • Gaining clarity requires litigation.

When a dispute arises over the interpretation of law, the greatest amount of clarity as to how the law applies to that particular situation is achieved through litigation, that is, by going to trial, getting a verdict, and establishing court precedent.

Such precedent can then be used by others who face similar circumstances.  In other words, when two parties go to court to settle a matter, the decision reached in that case helps others who find themselves in similar situations. There are thus externalities, or spillovers, associated with litigation, in which the social benefits of litigation are greater than the private benefits they provide to the original parties involved in the adjudicated dispute.

  • Litigation is expensive.

Fully adjudicating disputes has become prohibitively expensive for all but those cases that have the most at stake.  As a result, most parties choose the less expensive option of settling their disputes “out-of-court”.  However, such settlements do not provide much clarity as to how the law should be interpreted by others in similar circumstances.

  • Resources are wasted in disputing the same issues over and over.

While it might not pay the original two parties involved in a dispute to litigate the case, it would be beneficial to society as a whole to have the issue litigated so as to gain the consequential clarity.  That is, if you take all the small disputes involving the same legal issue and add up the costs spent trying to settle all the disagreements, the total costs would exceed the costs it would take to litigate the matter and provide general clarity.

So how do you solve the problem?  (I can’t believe I’m actually saying there’s too little litigation in the US!!!)

Part of the difficulty in addressing this type of issue is that the first time a dispute arises involving the interpretation of a law as it applies to some new issue, we (society) don’t necessarily know that that issue will end up leading to the same type of dispute over and over again.

On the other hand, there are certain issues for which it is (or becomes) clear (at least to some) that many people will eventually need the same type of clarification.  This point is admitted in the article (see the last paragraph cited above).

Generally, when there is too little of an activity taking place from a social point of view, one of the first proposals for increasing the incidence of the activity is for the government to subsidize it.  In this case, it would mean having the government pay part of the legal costs associated with litigating an issue the first time it brought to court, if it is believed that the same issue will arise again and again.  In this case, however, there are a couple of problems with this type of solution:

  • Where will the funds comes from that are used to subsidize the litigation?  Ideally, everyone who benefits from the clarification of a particular law would be the ones to pay into pot.  This clearly will not work in this case, as most people who need the clarification would probably not step forward and contribute, if they know they can free ride off the payments of others.
  • Who decides which cases should be subsidized, and how much funding should the government make available?  These two issues alone are probably big enough to sink this particular proposal.

Another possible solution would be for a special judge or panel to be assigned to make general clarifications to laws that “the experts” agree need further amplification.  Perhaps when an issue arises that is believed will end up causing a lot of other related disputes, a petition could be submitted to the designated judge or panel asking that the law at issue be clarified.  The judge or panel could then post the issue to the community, and if and when enough other members of the community agree that the law at issue needs clarification, then the judge or board could act.

More Blogs

Cannabis Cultivation: Seeds vs. Clones

26-09-2020 - Hits:1763 - Ruth Fisher - avatar Ruth Fisher

Cannabis plants are dioecious, that is, they are either male or female. Plant reproduction occurs naturally, when male plants pollinate female plants, causing female plants to produce seeds. New cannabis plants can thus be cultivated by collecting seeds from fertilized females and replanting them, or by buying seeds generated by...

Read more

Cannabis Cultivation: Indoor vs. Outdoor vs. Greenhouse

22-09-2020 - Hits:1448 - Ruth Fisher - avatar Ruth Fisher

There are three basic locales for growing cannabis: indoors, outdoors, or in greenhouses. Greenhouses enable growers to benefit from natural light, while also being able to strategically block out light to induce quicker flowering. Budget-friendly greenhouse operations are more subject natural climate variations, while higher-end greenhouses are more similar to...

Read more

Would the Endocannabinoid System Have Been Discovered Earlier without the Ban on…

10-06-2020 - Hits:1588 - Ruth Fisher - avatar Ruth Fisher

Cannabis was used medicinally in the Western world from the mid-1800s through 1940, even though doctors did not understand cannabis’s mechanisms of action. The Marijuana Tax At of 1937 Federally banned the use of cannabis in the US for either medical or recreational uses, and it restricted scientific studies of...

Read more

How Regulations Shape the Cannabis Industry

16-05-2020 - Hits:2367 - Ruth Fisher - avatar Ruth Fisher

  The cannabis industry is highly regulated, and the various regulations play a powerful role in shaping the structure, and thus outcome, of the industry. This analysis examines the following questions: How do cannabis market regulations shape market structure? Are the resulting outcomes favorable to suppliers and/or consumers? What are the pros and cons...

Read more

Cannabis Industry Rollouts: Lessons Learned from States’ Experiences

27-04-2020 - Hits:1754 - Ruth Fisher - avatar Ruth Fisher

Bart Schaneman from MJ Business Daily recently released, “2020 Cultivation Snapshot: U.S. Wholesale Marijuana Prices & Supply.” The information contained in the report helped cement certain insights I’ve had about the evolution of the cannabis market. Background info In addition to the myriad other laws and regulations, all states essentially have two...

Read more

A Data-Generating System: A Framework for Data Assessment

14-04-2020 - Hits:1069 - Ruth Fisher - avatar Ruth Fisher

Suppose I gave you, the Data Analyst, a dataset of information on sales of Ford automobiles, and suppose I told you to use that dataset to predict total national sales of Ford automobiles for next 12 months. What would you want to know about the data you were given? If you...

Read more

Hemp and CBD Market Supply

06-04-2020 - Hits:1890 - Ruth Fisher - avatar Ruth Fisher

The information in this post was compiled in an attempt to understand 2 issues: Does the cultivation of hemp differ depending on the hemp product supplied (fiber, seed, or flower)? Is the CBD produced from hemp (cannabis with ≤ 0.3% THC) identical to the CBD produced from marijuana (cannabis with > 0.3%...

Read more

Trends in Cannabis Patents Over Time

08-12-2019 - Hits:2353 - Ruth Fisher - avatar Ruth Fisher

Patent Counts by Year I searched the USPTO patent database for all patents for which the patent abstract contained any of the following terms: cannabis, cannabinoid, marijuana, tetrahydrocannabinoid, or cannabinol. My search yielded 914 patents. As seen in Figure 1, there were only a handful of cannabis patents each year until the...

Read more