Loud YES! And it only recently came off patent. This was really important for thermalcycler companies such as Bio-rad, which probably wouldn't be the name it is without those patents.
And it is not like patents prevent academics from doing research, either, as there are academic exceptions. In fact, the patent filing process forces the inventors to disclose how their invention works in detail, which makes it easier for academics to build on those ideas if they want to. It's only commercial applications that are really bound by IP licensing agreements, to my knowledge.
If you don't like it I couldn't care less :^).
Ctrl-F "IMO". No matches. Oops.
Ctrl-F "opinion". No matches. Oops.
And I'll leave this conversation here because neither of us is bothering to follow HN commenting guidelines at this point.
Good luck with your research and I hope that if you apply for a patent it will be granted sells well.
> 20+ years and counting
I took a moment to search for Morales Tapia in Google Patents and could not find any matches. You do have an impressive resume, though.
> I don't see companies making the exact same argument the other way around, i.e. "hey I just made a PCR, this is a really cool technique, I should find out who invented this and send them money because they deserve to be rich".
Is PCR patented, or was it at some point? Companies constantly pay patent royalties for inventions that they want to use, whether the patent is held by an academic institution or not.
If the inventors of PCR wanted to receive royalties from it, patent law was there to help them achieve just that.
I truly don't understand how somebody who works in research isn't familiar with this process.
> You (not you-you, the generic you) want to be a dick and close down an open ecosystem of innovation where millions have contributed only to buy yourself a condo and some LEGO sets?
Ew.