State funding sources for scientific research generally /want/ the research to be commercialized and incentivize this. They could require state ownership as condition of funding, but choose not to. A sibling comment cited the Bayh-Dole act, which created the current paradigm of private ownership of inventions stemming from federally funded research contracts. The nominal motivation was that the state had proven to be ineffective at promoting the commercialization and use of the technology resulting from its research contracts. Since then, federal research agencies have implemented programs specifically meant to guide researchers through early-stage commercialization [0] and to provide additional funds to support commercialization [1].

[0] https://www.nibib.nih.gov/research-funding/concept-clinic-co... [1] https://sbir.nih.gov/

This is a bewildering POV. If the research is published its public domain. If they then want to use that research to start a company why not? You could too if you read their dissertation and understood it well enough.

This is false.

1. Universities can and regularly do file patents, including public unis and including research funded with federal grants. See the Bayh-Dole Act.

2. Researchers can and often do choose not to publish research or research output (eg code) that might be commercially valuable.

3. Even the papers, including open access ones that can download and read for free, are almost never public domain.

Interestingly, the comment you are responding to imply none of what you said.

It simply states some facts and corrects parents misconceptions about how research is funded.

Publication does not equate to public domain: the manuscript itself is likely subject to some sort of copyright, and the underlying research may be the subject matter of one or more patents (pending or otherwise).