4 ms·
Versus, what? No public funding? No private utilization of public research? Public research should fall in the public domain, free of IP and open for any use.
by losteric 9y ago
Versus, what? No public funding? No private utilization of public research? Public research should fall in the public domain, free of IP and open for any use.
If anything, we should be doing more of this... create dedicated academic R&D funding streams by taxing established or dying industries in order to publicly explore new fields, and use X Prize-style programs or NASA's COTS/CRS programs to incentivize private commercialization. America needs jobs, what's better than creating new industries?
Plus, public investment in R&D has a good track record. This study from 1980 [1] indicates a $17 return over 18 years for every $1 invested in NASA - 1700% ROI. Returns depend on programs and the administration in office, but similar numbers can be obtained from other programs (NOAA and agricultural, military and medical research, etc). R&D is speculative, but most programs do much better than breaking even.
[1] https://er.jsc.nasa.gov/seh/economics.html https://er.jsc.nasa.gov/seh/economics.html
- nickpsecurity 9y ago"Versus, what? No public funding? No private utilization of public research?" Versus the taxpayer-funded I.P. being licensed to all parties in the country that funded it with the big corporations being forced to compete on better implementations delivered faster to customers. Big players can try to make billions, small players can innovate on top of same I.P. without a lawsuit, and individuals can even attempt to homebrew their own without a lawsuit.
- warkdarrior 9y agoThere is no sign in the article that only Intel and Qualcomm will have rights to the new design.
- nickpsecurity 9y agoIt's private companies doing the wofk with a track record of patenting and suing over their tech. Quite a bit of tech funded through NSF and DARPA gets patented. So, it should be assumed and mitigated.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]