|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, April 29 2013 @ 04:31 PM EDT |
No! It is you that has to prove your point. Most inventions are not profit
driven. Look at the History. Which appeared first Invention or Profit.
Profit is a fairly late invention!
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, April 29 2013 @ 05:08 PM EDT |
Most companies/people spend money developing products.
Then they try to get some additional revenue and patent parts
of it.
Not the other way around. Patents are the crumbs falling
from the table and not the main course. There are plenty of
reasons, lack of control being just one.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, April 29 2013 @ 07:52 PM EDT |
Talk about phrasing a question to elicit a specific non-response!
And when did you stop beating your wife?[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 30 2013 @ 06:40 PM EDT |
There's your evidence not everyone invents in order to receive patent-induced
monetary awards.
Linux Kernel: here's another piece of
evidence.
However, that doesn't speak to your requirement/statement. It
does speak to the original poster who said:
It is simply unproven
that if the potential financial windfall for patent licenses are not as good,
innovators will go home and stay on the couch.
There are plenty of
innovators who are doing their thing without aiming for patents even though they
could very well qualify for patents.
It's interesting you twisted that
into:
Please provide links to a for profit company that gave away
patented technology to a standards body with the hopes of loosing all they
invested in it.
First: No one but you stated anyone "gives
something away with the hopes of loosing all they invested". Just because
someone expects to receive non-direct-monetary benefits that you don't
understand, doesn't mean they hope to loose.
Second: For Profit companies
- in a sense - give away patented technology. See Redhat, Google and IBMs
patent promises as examples.
The above should be sufficient proof that
innovation will continue - by both those who patent their tech and those who
don't - whether or not patents go away.
Your turn: Provide evidence that
innovation will cease if patents go away.
RAS[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
- ODF Format - Authored by: Kilz on Tuesday, April 30 2013 @ 06:54 PM EDT
|
|
|
|
