Re:On the use of a life (2020)
by light_hue_1 on Monday July 04, 2022 @09:49PM
(#31983459)
> Yes, but that doesn't prevent them from licensing things to organizations with a lot of money regardless of intent
Why in God's name would a corporation with a lot of money pay for a patent they don't want to develop? Wallpaper is a lot cheaper at Home Depot.
Seriously. This doesn't pass the most basic "is this remotely plausible" test.
Anyway, universities tend to give licenses that make them money as the patent is used. There is no world under which they want them to be wasted.
Re:On the use of a life (2020)
by cratermoon on Monday July 04, 2022 @11:17PM
(#31983938)
If you don't believe that patents and corporate secrets are bought and kept under warps to protect profits for existing business lines, I can't disabuse you of your naivete.
If you sell widgets for big bucks and someone invents a nearly free widget replacement that could interfere with your primary income.
Point to one example of this happening. Since patent ownership is by definition public information, it should be easy to find an example. I'll wait.
Re:On the use of a life (2020)
by cratermoon on Tuesday July 05, 2022 @12:39PM
(#31990466)
The forerunners of ExxonMobil patented technologies for electric cars and low emissions vehicles as early as 1963 [1]
1. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/may/20/oil-company...
Yes, but that doesn't prevent them from licensing things to organizations with a lot of money regardless of intent. If there's enough money involved, say a multi-million dollar endowment, the academic administration wouldn't give two shits about whether or not the licensee develops it.