|
|
|
| Authored by: Kilz on Tuesday, April 30 2013 @ 11:35 PM EDT |
Please point out a single incident where anyone
but you speaks of
the "expectation of loosing money".
From the top
reply.
"It is simply unproven that if the potential financial
windfall
for patent licenses are not as good,"
Fabricating a dispute? No,
turning it on its head to look at
it from the opposite point of view perhaps.
The top reply
wanted to look at it as if money wasnt a factor, so I asked
for
examples of where it wasnt a factor, namely a company,
and companies are driven
to make money, giving something
away for free and expecting to loose everything
invested in
it with no hope of return.
Additionally, you're
contradicting your own
statement with evidence that you yourself present. To
paraphrase what you said about IBM:
No, I wasnt. Reread my last
post.
"Because if for example you list IBM as allowing
patents
to
be used in the kernel it would not be the case."
I was listing an
example some people would use, IBM, and
explaining why it would not be a good
choice for someone to
use in a reply to prove a company gives away patents
expecting to loose money. IBM expects to make money
indirectly.
That one does not have to have a monetary value
intent behind a patent - or such intent behind patentable
technology that they
do not patent - in order to have
incentive to innovate!
I
disagree when it comes to companies, I think that the
desire to make money is
the main focus. Whether its made
directly or indirectly.
Individual people
may choose to innovate and not have a
desire to make money. But I truly believe
those that do
that, do not patent things.
What drives people to innovate is
varied. I seriously
doubt that we could come up with all the reasons why
someone
would in a short amount of time. But I do think that money
drives a
lot, if not most,
of it. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
