4 ms·

An interesting question would be whether or not Volvo would do the same thing today if they made another such invention.

by beloch 13y ago

gcb0 13y ago
You don't have to go far or wonder up scenarios. Just look at what happens to ANY safety patent, save from this one. none of them are free. they all carry royalties. Better yet, get away from automobiles and look at medical patents. The most lucrative ones are for disposable cathereres(not sure the word in english). they are sometimes nothing more than a straw and a needle. yet patents abound. How many lives could them save with each safety or health patent? Should we draw a line that if a patent is useful it should be free? ...that goes directly opposite to the justification of a patent to begin with.
- derleth 13y ago
  > cathereres(not sure the word in english) 'Catheters' is the word in English.
- zanny 13y ago
  Patents are meant to prevent small independent inventors from being crushed by big group to-market strategy taking their invention and out-competing them because they didn't have to invest the R&D. Today, there is no R&D on a lot of this crap, the big guys just patent it to crush the smaller guys with the patents instead of taking their ideas. At least in the former, the information is out there.
latj 13y ago
You cant compare Volvo then and Volvo now. But if the question is- would a young Swedish researcher today consider giving away an important invention that would help the world...I think it could still happen.
- umsm 13y ago
  The problem is that most researchers are employed. The inventions are thus property of their employer.
  - tuix 13y ago
    Unless they are employed by a university. In Sweden, employees of universities always own the invention even though universities function like companies in most aspects.
redthrowaway 13y ago
I think the presence of institutions like the IIHS, the safety tests done, and the importance placed on safety by consumers would simply encourage other manufacturers to license the invention. Remember, at the time, manufacturers decided not to include seat belts at all, because they didn't want people to think cars weren't safe. The market is very different, now, and if there were some invention that came along that had as great an impact as the three-point belt I'm sure you would see other manufacturers license or copy it.
ImprovedSilence 13y ago
But back then, it's not like seat belts were mandatory on autos. Heck, there was probably quite the resistance to wearing them for a decade or two as well.. Volvo had to SELL the idea of a seat belt, it's not like the other companies were falling all over themselves to get this new feature, at least in the beginning.

An interesting question would be whether or not Volvo would do the same thing today if they made another such invention.

by beloch 13y ago

An interesting question would be whether or not Volvo would do the same thing today if they made another such invention.

gcb0 13y ago

You don't have to go far or wonder up scenarios. Just look at what happens to ANY safety patent, save from this one. none of them are free. they all carry royalties. Better yet, get away from automobiles and look at medical patents. The most lucrative ones are for disposable cathereres(not sure the word in english). they are sometimes nothing more than a straw and a needle. yet patents abound. How many lives could them save with each safety or health patent? Should we draw a line that if a patent is useful it should be free? ...that goes directly opposite to the justification of a patent to begin with.

derleth 13y ago
> cathereres(not sure the word in english) 'Catheters' is the word in English.
zanny 13y ago
Patents are meant to prevent small independent inventors from being crushed by big group to-market strategy taking their invention and out-competing them because they didn't have to invest the R&D. Today, there is no R&D on a lot of this crap, the big guys just patent it to crush the smaller guys with the patents instead of taking their ideas. At least in the former, the information is out there.

latj 13y ago

You cant compare Volvo then and Volvo now. But if the question is- would a young Swedish researcher today consider giving away an important invention that would help the world...I think it could still happen.

umsm 13y ago
The problem is that most researchers are employed. The inventions are thus property of their employer.
- tuix 13y ago
  Unless they are employed by a university. In Sweden, employees of universities always own the invention even though universities function like companies in most aspects.

redthrowaway 13y ago

I think the presence of institutions like the IIHS, the safety tests done, and the importance placed on safety by consumers would simply encourage other manufacturers to license the invention. Remember, at the time, manufacturers decided not to include seat belts at all, because they didn't want people to think cars weren't safe. The market is very different, now, and if there were some invention that came along that had as great an impact as the three-point belt I'm sure you would see other manufacturers license or copy it.

ImprovedSilence 13y ago

But back then, it's not like seat belts were mandatory on autos. Heck, there was probably quite the resistance to wearing them for a decade or two as well.. Volvo had to SELL the idea of a seat belt, it's not like the other companies were falling all over themselves to get this new feature, at least in the beginning.