17 ms·

All Our Patent Are Belong To You

1999 points by gkoberger 12y ago

obelos 12y ago
Translation: our pinch point is supplier scaling.
fidotron 12y ago
The interesting subtext here is that for Tesla to fulfil its potential more support for electric cars in wider society is needed, and while everyone else struggles to build electric cars the infrastructure won't catch up. Opening up, in this sense, could be seen to be a selfish endeavour, but still a positive one, aiming to position Tesla as the Apple of the electric car market, only mildly less litigious.
josephschmoe 12y ago
I'm curious Mr. Musk, does this mean "Give us a call and we will license you our patents at no cost."?
- fleitz 12y ago
  Phone and ask?
beltex 12y ago
Fun aside: Tesla patent wall in question via Steve Jurvetson https://www.flickr.com/photos/jurvetson/14405402742/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/jurvetson/14405402742/
mwsherman 12y ago
There is no legal covenant here. I imagine Tesla’s definition of “good faith” is “we evaluate on a case by case basis”. Which amounts to “if we like you” and “we reserve the right”. If they wanted these patents to be open source, they would license them explicitly.
- icambron 12y ago
  I'm curious about this. To what degree is a CEO writing and publicly distributing the statement, "Tesla will not initiate patent lawsuits against anyone who, in good faith, wants to use our technology." legally binding? "In good faith" actually strikes me as reasonably interpretable by a court, so I guess the question is just how much "he said so in a blog post" counts. I'd love to hear a lawyer weigh in on this.
  - jonnathanson 12y ago
    "Good faith" is somewhat subjective, and usually it depends on context. Generally speaking, it means acting in an as-stated, forthright, non-deceptive manner. For example, if I agree to explore a partnership with you "in good faith," it means I am serious about the possibility of a partnership. I am not merely wasting your time for the purposes of distracting you, defrauding you, conducting market espionage, or sending false signals. Basically, I am acting "in good faith" when I honestly believe I am doing what I claim to be doing, for the reasons I claim to be doing it. You assume I am acting in good faith, and vice versa, unless a pattern of actions or evidence gives sufficient cause to doubt it. IANAL, but I've dealt with "good faith" issues in business development and licensing contracts more times than I wish I'd had to. There is usually an implicit assumption that all contracts are entered into in good faith unless proven otherwise -- which means I'd almost definitely want to enter into an agreement with Tesla if I were to use their technology.
    - sitkack 12y ago
      Bad faith would be GM patenting an obvious extension to a Tesla patent. What I think Musk is trying to do is poison the electric car patent pool with Milk and Honey. It isn't just Tesla patents that matter, but the whole landscape. Patents stifle the spread and pace of good idea distribution.
      - deleted 12y ago
        [deleted]
    - 12y ago
smackfu 12y ago
"Tesla will not initiate patent lawsuits against anyone who, in good faith, wants to use our technology." What exactly does that little "in good faith" clause mean in there?
- oddevan 12y ago
  Agreed. I was hoping for a link to a BSD- or Creative Commons-style license, but this was only a reason for not [suing anyone] using the patents (as welcome as that is). [edited for clarification]
- McGlockenshire 12y ago
  Until clarified, it kind of reads like "independently came up with the same idea, but did not research patents or reach out to us for licensing first."
  - chc 12y ago
    That definitely doesn't sound right to me, because it says "wants to use our technology." That implies awareness that one is using Tesla's technology, because otherwise this promise wouldn't mean anything since people who don't believe they're using Tesla's technology wouldn't think they fall under it anyway. I am having trouble working out what it does mean, though. Based on the rest of the article, my best guess is "Does not act in a predatory manner toward other carmakers, such as initiating patent lawsuits of their own." Basically, I think Musk is trying to say that Tesla are willing to cooperate toward the goal of making electric cars a bigger presence if you are, but they don't want people using their patents in conjunction with underhanded tactics to try and monopolize the market.
  - dnautics 12y ago
    I think it reads more generally, as in "for any purpose whatsoever except patent litigation".
  - oddevan 12y ago
    I feel like (again, until clarified) it's more broad than that. "Wants to use our technology" certainly implies to me that I can seek out Tesla's patent applications and attempt to build using them.
hengheng 12y ago
> Tesla will not initiate patent lawsuits against anyone who, in good faith, wants to use our technology. I'm not familiar with US legislation, but from my perspective this is just Musk on his soap-box making a statement. It's not something I can rely on while building a business that possibly (!) infringes one of Tesla's patents. They may retract their statement and reconsider at any time, especially when times get tough. It's nice to hear this, sure, but I fail to see the meat in this announcement.
- gtirloni 12y ago
  Are YOU going to built a business around Tesla's patents? If so, you just got a very credible hint that Tesla might be interested in talking to you. Isn't that great? Sometimes I feel doing business in the US is liking playing with your toys while your mom (courts) are watching. No wonder the legal industry is so huge. It has ingrained in people's mind that other people's word are worth nothing. I wish we could look past that... go talk to the guy (or his whatever-department that handles licensing matters). If you're really interested in starting this business, it won't take much of your time.
  - hnnewguy 12y ago
    >It has ingrained in people's mind that other people's word are worth nothing. Except that the legal enforcement of property rights is something that separates the First World with the rest of the planet, and is an engine for economic growth.
    - TeMPOraL 12y ago
      Except that such big dependency on legal enforcement and settling everything in court is clearly an American think - we don't see anything near it in Europe.
- dragonwriter 12y ago
  > I'm not familiar with US legislation, but from my perspective this is just Musk on his soap-box making a statement. It's not something I can rely on while building a business that possibly (!) infringes one of Tesla's patents. They may retract their statement and reconsider at any time, especially when times get tough. The question is whether its a specific enough statement as to reasonably induce reliance, and whether promissory estoppel would apply. It seems to me (and I'm not an expert) like it may be close enough as to seriously threaten Tesla's ability to successfully prosecute suits, and vague enough that anyone else would still be leery about using anything Tesla has patented.
nchlswu 12y ago
Didn't Twitter declare something similar? Is there anything they can do that's binding outside of a declarative 'we won't sue you unless...' statement?
- dnautics 12y ago
  Yes, they could hand over the patents to RPX, and pay the annual fee; instead of 'as protection' it would be 'as a donation to the public'. Perhaps an odd use of RPX, but it would be really effective. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RPX_Corporation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RPX_Corporation
- smackfu 12y ago
  IIRC, Twitter's approach was to also give the inventor a transferable license to the patent. That way if Twitter used it offensively, the inventor could independently license the patent to the company who was being sued.
  - dnautics 12y ago
    That's very reminiscent of the Spooner vs. Tucker argument about dual ownership of a patent; Spooner conceding to Tucker that co-inventors should each be able to freely license, then Tucker asking if one inventor were to give away the license to the world for free would he be infringing on the other inventor's rights.
aresant 12y ago
In the biotech space there exists a system called "patentleft" which theoretically provides royalty-free licensing of patents with the stipulation that any derivative works / improvements also be licensed under the same terms. Seems like there is good potential to build on the momentum of Tesla's announcement to formalize the process, and answer the questions that I'm sure will emerge in this thread - eg more akin to an Creative Commons (which is very well defined and practical). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patentleft http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patentleft
- bthomas 12y ago
  How common is this - are there any well known examples? (If so, they're not in wikipedia!)
- myth_buster 12y ago
  Patentleft is analogous to 'Copyleft' which is a play on words to Copyright.
notdonspaulding 12y ago
These are big words, even coming from the extreme underdog in the auto industry. What exactly is Elon committing to here? Is Tesla planning on releasing any design documentation, or technical specifications or manufacturing process information? It's great that they won't enforce patents in an effort to not stifle innovation, but do they plan on taking any actions that will encourage innovation?
- matthewmcg 12y ago
  Their patents and patent applications will be published and should (in theory) enable someone to practice the inventions they cover.
- thibautx 12y ago
  Since many auto manufacturing companies doing R&D and Tesla, having already created technologies good enough to bring to market, there will definitely be incentive for taking action. Tesla has already created technologies to run cars that rival (performance) gasoline cars, and access to those technologies/designs will accelerate their own EV efforts.
bthomas 12y ago
He makes an interesting implicit argument - that it's okay to use patents to block established players from innovating with you, but not to block new startups from challenging you.
- sdpurtill 12y ago
  He's not saying that. He's arguing that, were Tesla not to take the patents, there was a good chance one of the established auto makers would have taken them. This would have been the problem, as the entrenched players probably would have used the patents to stifle innovation in order to maintain dominance.
jaekwon 12y ago
What can an innovator do besides filing a defensive patent? I've heard of various strategies like publishing the work in as many forums as possible; publishing it on IP.com; filing a patent application and withdrawing it; filing it and pledging; etc. It would be nice if there were a step by step guide written by an attorney--ideally an ex-patent attorney--that goes lists the steps in order of priority/cost/ease for both individual innovators and companies with deeper pockets.
- dnautics 12y ago
  There used to be a mechanism called the "statutory invention registration" but that got eliminated in the 2013 AIA. This is another option (although kind of outside the box in terms of what RPX normally used for), although it's likely to be pricey: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RPX_Corporation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RPX_Corporation
Arjuna 12y ago
Assuming that this search represents nearly all of them, that is approximately 133 patents: https://www.google.com/?tbm=pts&gws_rd=ssl#q=inassignee:%22Tesla+Motors,+Inc.%22&safe=off&tbm=pts https://www.google.com/?tbm=pts&gws_rd=ssl#q=inassignee:%22T... Edit: Nice catch, peter_l_downs ... I didn't realize that the estimated search result of 6,430 would be off by such a large factor.
- peter_l_downs 12y ago
  Interestingly, try navigating through – here's the link to page 14: https://www.google.com/?tbm=pts&gws_rd=ssl#q=inassignee%3A%22Tesla+Motors%2C+Inc.%22&safe=off&start=130&tbm=pts https://www.google.com/?tbm=pts&gws_rd=ssl#q=inassignee%3A%2.... I remember reading or being told that Google only estimates how many results there are, and refines the estimate as you navigate further down the list. As of page 14 there seem to be only 133 results; a far cry from 6,430.
  - Istof 12y ago
    Apparently they don't estimate, they inflate how many results there are... For example, I never seen a case when their "estimate" was lower then the actual number of results.
    - espadrine 12y ago
      An upper bound is a valid estimation. "Inflating" assumes that they have a good approximation, and that they arbitrarily increase it. I don't think that they do that.
      - Perseids 12y ago
        > An upper bound is a valid estimation. Most people don't expect upper bounds, though, when talking about estimations. I for one would appreciate a less-than or less-than-or-equal sign when this is truly an upper bound, as it gives me a better idea of what to expect of the actual number of results in relation to the estimation.
graeham 12y ago
Sounds to me like the "in good faith" clause is to retain the patents for a defense should someone try to come after Telsa for infringing. Quite an interesting business move and pretty unprecedented as far as I know, at least for a non-software company. Presumably he is hoping that this will encourage improvement to infrastructure. He is also probably thinking he can build higher quality cars and cheaper than others, irrespective of if they are electric or not (probably this is true).
- oddevan 12y ago
  That is certainly the most plausible reading of that phrase, but it still seems like it could be put into a licence pretty easily, along the lines of "User of these patents hereby relinquishes all claims of infringement against Tesla Motors for any patents the user may own or license".
  - jayrox 12y ago
    i read "in good faith" as "you may use these as you wish but don't turn around and try to sue us for using something you hold a patent for" i could be totally off the mark though
    - TeMPOraL 12y ago
      I read it more along the lines of "you may use these as you wish but don't try to turn around and screw the electrification of transportation, harming humanity's future for your own short-term gain". Musk isn't doing it for money after all.
      - fragsworth 12y ago
        > Musk isn't doing it for money after all. No, it's for money. It's the charging stations. There aren't enough of them, and it's the biggest problem they have. Tesla needs the big manufacturers to build electric cars so they will put charging stations everywhere.
ISL 12y ago
Without an explicit licensing agreement, one should consider the fate of Troy, even if Tesla's present intentions are good.
colanderman 12y ago
FFS, change the title back to what it was submitted with! "All Our Patent Are Belong To You" makes no sense out of context. At least the original title said something about Tesla Motors.
- chc 12y ago
  This has been discussed a lot over the past few years. The title-changing policy is very widely disliked and leads to a lot of clearly poor results like this, but the mods are completely uninterested in changing it, so there it is. I don't know why we're even allowed to write titles anymore — it may just as well be populated by an automatic HTTP request.
  - colanderman 12y ago
    Yes I know, I've been here for many years. It just feels good to vent sometimes (at the cost of some karma).
- fuddle 12y ago
  Mr Musk, I expected better grammar from you.
  - peterarmstrong 12y ago
    It's a meme: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_your_base http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_your_base
    - fuddle 12y ago
      Right, I'll get my coat..
    - larrys 12y ago
      Thanks for pointing that out (I didn't know that). That said I think it's a bit immature and out of place in a public blog post (which will no doubt be repeated elsewhere) for such a visible company that wishes to be taken seriously.
DogeDogeDoge 12y ago
Pretty awesome :) if it will not be empty words we maybe could have much more momentum in the field of electric cars.
ekanes 12y ago
Volvo famously acted similarly with their invention of the seatbelt.
- swimfar 12y ago
  It was actually their invention of the three-point seatbelt in 1959. http://www.wired.com/2009/08/strapping-success-the-3-point-seatbelt-turns-50/ http://www.wired.com/2009/08/strapping-success-the-3-point-s...
hatred 12y ago
Elon Musk #Respect
ww520 12y ago
This is a pretty good gesture. It will be good to spurt innovation since smaller players in the area don't need to worry about infringing. What about the defensive measure? To defend against being sued. It would be good if Tesla pools the patents with others to form an "open patent" club where all the interested parties can join and use the patent to defend against infringement lawsuits.
- lilsunnybee 12y ago
  Think you mean 'spur' not 'spurt'. Sorry to be a pedant! Great points. :-)
  - ww520 12y ago
    Thanks for pointing out the error. I'll pay closer attention next time I use it. :)
supergeek133 12y ago
Perfect move by Tesla, they've hit a wall on progress that the big auto companies and government will allow. Let's see what a mob of similar armed companies will do.
sidcool 12y ago
Inspite of all the negative reactions here, I applaud this move. The preceding statement to the one with 'good faith' is pretty important >"If we clear a path to the creation of compelling electric vehicles, but then lay intellectual property landmines behind us to inhibit others, we are acting in a manner contrary to that goal"
larrys 12y ago
Does anyone know if Musk requires non competes of Tesla's employees? Separately using the "All Our Patent Are Belong To You" meme (as has been pointed out below by peterarmstrong ) appears to be a clear "in your face" to "the man". Most people I would imagine aren't aware of this meme (I wasn't) and using it in a public press release seems a bit odd to me.
iancarroll 12y ago
Are there any legal documents that certify this? I'm not a lawyer, but would this post actually count as a "license"?
pnathan 12y ago
I see this as essentially an open note to hardware tech companies asking them to come by and talk about licensing and interop deals without worrying that Tesla will be a hardcase about any possible IP infringement.
- loganu 12y ago
  That may not have been their intention, but that's what came to mind for me as well.
ibrad 12y ago
This is a bold move, and of course open to interpretation. But I am still optimistic about it. You can argue why they have patents in the first place, remember that if they didn't or sold it to a third party it will come back to bite their ass. It is much better to hold the patent and allow others to used without being worried about getting sued. I am sure the big auto makers may consider taking advantage of this situation to crush tesla, but Elon Musk is known for not getting distracted by the petty things.
ajsharp 12y ago
Interesting point: > At Tesla, however, we felt compelled to create patents out of concern that the big car companies would copy our technology and then use their massive manufacturing, sales and marketing power to overwhelm Tesla. We couldn’t have been more wrong. The unfortunate reality is the opposite: electric car programs (or programs for any vehicle that doesn’t burn hydrocarbons) at the major manufacturers are small to non-existent, constituting an average of far less than 1% of their total vehicle sales. I read this as effectively saying that it's easy for them to take this step, relative to companies in other industries (Apple, Google, Amazon, et al) because none of Tesla's competitors even have the ability to make use of their technology. Makes me wonder if Musk would have done the same thing if Tesla were a software company.
- nolok 12y ago
  That's because he is being disingenuous there, he is not talking about money invested in R&D but percentage of electric cars in total sales. Those companies have an established market share which correspond to a massive number of non-electric car sales, it is not surprising in the least that the new developing area they are coming in (electric) is being very small right now. That's doesn't mean they aren't doing a lot of R&D or lack the ability to uses those patents.
ma2rten 12y ago
> Tesla will not initiate patent lawsuits against anyone who, in good faith, wants to use our technology. What does that even mean? How do you make cars in bad faith?
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
Alex_MJ 12y ago
(1) I love this. (2) Having limited legal knowledge, I'm curious what he means with "a lottery ticket to a lawsuit". Is he indicating that patenting something would make a company more likely to get sued? My basic understanding is the opposite, that patents yield protection from lawsuits rather than create exposure to them. Is this flawed?
- TeMPOraL 12y ago
  Looking at software patents, I read (2) as saying that a patent is a lottery ticket, in which winning tickets are the patents someone accidentally infringed, thus opening a way for you to sue them out of their money.
rayiner 12y ago
I love Elon Musk, and kudos to them for doing this, but it's useful to read between the lines: > Yesterday, there was a wall of Tesla patents in the lobby of our Palo Alto headquarters. This is consistent with my view of how engineers in the traditional disciplines view patents. > At Tesla, however, we felt compelled to create patents out of concern that the big car companies would copy our technology and then use their massive manufacturing, sales and marketing power to overwhelm Tesla This is the precise thing that patents are designed to prevent: to keep the market from turning into a race to see who can outsource most efficiently to China and inundate the public most completely with advertising. > The unfortunate reality is the opposite: electric car programs (or programs for any vehicle that doesn’t burn hydrocarbons) at the major manufacturers are small to non-existent, constituting an average of far less than 1% of their total vehicle sales. So the other manufacturers didn't copy Tesla's technology, either because they are incapable of it or because they didn't feel there was enough money in it relative to their traditional markets. > We believe that Tesla, other companies making electric cars, and the world would all benefit from a common, rapidly-evolving technology platform. In other words, it helps Tesla more to have lots of companies developing electric cars to push back on regulatory barriers and consumer perceptions than it does for them to protect themselves against larger manufacturers copying their technology. Also buried in here is the assumption that Tesla is, now, far enough ahead of its potential competitors that it doesn't matter if they copy the technology. I think this is the right move for Tesla, but there's a lot of dynamics at play that have nothing to do with the usefulness of patents in general.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
  - rayiner 12y ago
    The free-rider effect is not a "post-facto rationalization." It's rooted in a strong economic basis: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_rider_problem http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_rider_problem.
- wyager 12y ago
  >This is the precise thing that patents are designed to prevent: to keep the market from turning into a race to see who can outsource most efficiently to China and inundate the public most completely with advertising. I have absolutely no idea how you possibly came to this conclusion.
natural219 12y ago
If you want to track the death of the cultural vision of Silicon Valley -- the belief that some people, at least, can rise above petty human squabbling and competition and are legitimately working to better humanity -- look no further than this thread. Every top comment is a skeptical one. "This is clearly a great PR move, but has no teeth." "How do you enforce this guarantee?" Etc. These are reasonable questions, but as Shaw said, all progress comes from unreasonable men. I cannot help but be fundamentally depressed as I read these comments. In my view, Elon Musk has, moreso than any other human except maybe Bill Gates, given every absolute inch of human effort and genius to fight to solve the world's biggest problems. And all we have for him, after benefiting freely from the fruit of his labor, is skepticism. We want more. It's not enough. It's never enough. Yes, Tesla Motors is a company operating in a media-hyped 2014 America. I know some of you are butthurt that he engages in the same "dishonest" PR tactics that other companies do. GET THE FUCK OVER IT. The end product he's producing will save humanity. That all of America has not rallied behind Musk and Tesla as the most important movement and achievement in the last 100 years of human history absolutely blows my mind. Not only do we not recognize his goals or his achievements, we actively try and bring him down and shit on his accomplishments. "Well, they invented a pretty cool electric motor, sure, but they were kind of dishonest in that one press release that one time." Go fuck yourself. I want to say "I'm done with Hacker News", but we know that's not true. I'm supremely disappointed in all of you. Godspeed, Musk. I thought this was a great announcement, and I'm behind you 100%. I just hope you can finish your work before our shitty, myopic, destructive society tears you down. Here's to faith.
- TeMPOraL 12y ago
  This. You captured perfectly my own sentiment towards this thread, and Tesla-related threads in general. Really, pretty much every single thing Musk does proves that he's trying to honestly help solve biggest problems of humanity, and still people disect his every word in order to find some way to say that yes, he's as selfish bastard as everyone else. I strongly hope that he doesn't give a single damn about such opinions. It would be a shame to see those projects derailed by petty skepticism. Come to think of it, maybe we, as a civilisation, as a culture, are just proving that we don't deserve to live, since not only can't we be bothered to fix the mess we've made, we actively make it difficult for the few of us who want to save us from our own stupidity? > I just hope you can finish your work before our shitty, myopic, distructive society tears you down. Here's to faith. Here's to faith.
vonsydov 12y ago
Holy shite.
kirk21 12y ago
If you want to learn more about Elon Musk, you can start here: http://everyelonmuskvideo.tumblr.com/ http://everyelonmuskvideo.tumblr.com/
- sallyzhp 12y ago
  Respect
dmritard96 12y ago
I wonder if they will consider more open source also?
volandovengo 12y ago
How can you not love this guy?
- Shivetya 12y ago
  I do love the humor, that sets them even further apart from the old crew
siscia 12y ago
You want to make money or you want to change the world ? I really liked Tesla here, there is the "good faith" deal, but still...
iamjdg 12y ago
this is another marketing ploy. this is also the beginning of Elon preparing for his next career move. Elon's realizing he has hit the technical and economic limits of all battery vehicles and can't deliver. now that he has given away all his patents, he will make moves to distance himself from Tesla. he will hand over the reins to someone else. step away. start another unrelated business. and when tesla crashes and burns (no pun intended) he will be able to say it wasn't his fault, that he left them with all the tools and "they" couldn't make it happen. in the executive world they call it the "sideways shuffle" or the "Teflon shoulder".
andrewtbham 12y ago
Is the title a reference to "all your base are belong to us?"
- andrewtbham 12y ago
  To answer my own question, yes and the Elon Musk reference is already added in wikipedia. That was quick. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_your_base_are_belong_to_us http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_your_base_are_belong_to_us
- izzydata 12y ago
  I found it pretty weird that someone like Elon would make such a reference. The site just looks too professional for the out of place internet meme.
samstave 12y ago
So, would this mean that Tesla would be open to a cottage industry where anyone could start a company building a different body type on top of their drivetrain? More specifically - could you just buy the S chassis/drivetrain from tesla and build say a delivery van body on top of it?
nbouscal 12y ago
Alex Tabarrok comments on this: "I believe that this announcement will be discussed in business schools for years to come much like Henry Ford’s announcement of the $5 a day wage." http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2014/06/tesla-says-all-our-patent-are-belong-to-you.html http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2014/06/tes...
- danielweber 12y ago
  Just like everyone remembers when the US bought up and public-domained all the aeronautic patents. EDIT I should explicitly say that I am being sarcastic. Mr Tabarrok is believing what he wants to be true.
  - jeffh 12y ago
    Most people are actually unaware of Ford's "innovations" on pay, or the reasoning behind them, but that does not dilute the profound impact the actions had.
    - superuser2 12y ago
      It's 4th grade US history curriculum.
      - btbuildem 12y ago
        most people don't live in the US
        vertis 12y ago
        Lies!
        superuser2 12y ago
        Approximately 100% of people under the jurisdiction of US patent law and influenced by the American auto industry do.
      - 12y ago
notastartup 12y ago
Elon Musk is a heartthrob.
- notastartup 12y ago
  looks like anti-Musk zombies at it with the downvotes in the comments
beamatronic 12y ago
Does Tesla want the big automakers to build cars with equal capabilities as the Model S? Assuming they did so, would they not be more cost-competitive due to economies of scale? Their mission of promoting sustainable transporation might be at odds with their fiduciary duty to their shareholders then. If Tesla really wanted to see the big auto makers build more capable electric cars, AND if they also want to be a profitable enterprise, THEN, the best course of action would be to OEM the powertrain parts that they have already invested in inventing and building.
- mcb3k 12y ago
  Note that Tesla owns the super charging stations, and is also aiming to stand up a large scale battery production facility. Assuming that the patents would lead to other auto-manufacturers to use the same standards that Tesla uses, this would mean that the would need to either build their own batteries, or buy them from Tesla. Since Tesla is making the Gigafactory so that the price of batteries will drop, it's likely to be cheaper to buy them from Tesla than standing up their own infrastructure to handle it. So, even if they aren't selling as many cars as the big automakers, they can still sell batteries and access to the super charging stations to the big players. In any case, I think a sufficient amount of people would probably still buy a Tesla because of the brand recognition, even if the big auto-makers were making solid electric cars.
patio11 12y ago
So an informal non-aggression pact is nice, but absolutely no automobile manufacturer would rely on that when a new car costs a significant fraction of a billion dollars to bring to market. (If I were a cynical man, I might think this didn't escape their notice.) If it were me, and the true intent was to distribute the Tesla patents as widely as possible, I would have said "Tesla pledges to license its entire patent portfolio, on a worldwide non-exclusive no-royalty basis, to any interested party. We will ask for consideration in the amount of $1 for a 99 year license. Your lawyers and accountants can reassure you that these sort of symbolic commitments hold up in court. They'll also no doubt ask to see the full terms, which are about as boring as you'd expect, and which are available from our Legal Department."
- andrewfong 12y ago
  If I were Tesla, I'd also request that the licensing party grant a reciprocal bulk license to Tesla as well. Or, barring that, that Tesla reserves the right to revoke the license if you initiate a patent lawsuit against it.
  - yonran 12y ago
    Does there exist such a patent license with no security holes? I would imagine that it would read, “License will be revoked if you 1) Sue me for patent infringement. 2) Sell a patent to a company that sues me for patent infringement (like Intellectual Ventures does). 3) Sponsor the development of a patent, and the owner of the patent sues me for patent infringement. 4) Contract with a patent pool that sues me for patent infringement. 5) Sue my partners or customers for patent infringement (like Apple vs. Google’s partners)...” and so on ad infinitum.
    - stcredzero 12y ago
      One would also have clauses to ensure that the products/devices produced under license would not be designed for lock-in and be compatible with electric cars from other companies.
askar_yu 12y ago
"All Our Patent Are Belong To You" this sentence sounds grammatically incorrect to my non-native-English ear (O_o)
- bdcs 12y ago
  You are correct. "All Our Patent Are Belong To You" is a reference to this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_your_base_are_belong_to_us http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_your_base_are_belong_to_us FYI, in correct English the sentence would read, "All of our patents belong to you."
nullz 12y ago
If I were building a giant battery factory, I would also encourage others to make electric cars.
- Ryel 12y ago
  Or if you wanted to be John D Rockefeller, rather than Henry Ford.
yaddayadda 12y ago
I wonder if this will spur WikiSpeed (an open source car group) to also support an electric engine module? http://wikispeed.org/ http://wikispeed.org/
NicoJuicy 12y ago
It i were Google (and manufacturing cars) or Volvo (who also has a impressive driverless car: http://goo.gl/qWU7DS http://goo.gl/qWU7DS ). I would go all in on this. A niche product (in the current condition) and usable driverless electric cars. You aren't really competing with Tesla, because you have a total different audience.
reiichiroh 12y ago
Love the Zero Wing reference.
hyp0 12y ago
I love Elon's PR. He reframes himself as a champion of humanity, above ego competition, to make you feel good (and I do!). He simultaneously criticises the competition, in those terms. And I also agree he was right to fear the better-resourced incumbents to duplicate his tech for free, unfounded though it was. He doesn't mention this, but at this point, he is also well ahead of his real competition (fellow disruptors) in market terms, and so it won't harm him to release these patents.
- hyp0 12y ago
  It's weird, I always get downvoted on HN for saying I love Elon, and analysing what he's doing. Something similar used to happen with Apple posts.
  - hyp0 12y ago
    See what I mean?
codewiz 12y ago
Funny how the companies with the best engineering also tend to be those with the best business ethics. Kudos to Tesla for being once again disruptive and innovative in the risk-averse and ailing automotive industry.
haberman 12y ago
That's great. I wonder if they will do a similar thing with their proprietary supercharger plug. They'd need a way to charge non-Tesla drivers for the energy though.
briantakita 12y ago
But, but, how will Tesla find the incentive to innovate without patents?
syedzbadar 12y ago
I really admire Elon Musk--a lot. His insight that Tesla’s real competition isn't the Fords, Chryslers, etc., but rather it’s the momentum behind gasoline cars. And, if that momentum is the actual competition, then that momentum/competition can be broken by open sourcing Tesla’s technology… I think that his specific move on patents (as it relates to the auto industry) is an excellent example of having the perfect balance of having customer obsession and being competition aware.
bld 12y ago
This is one of the most clear & succinct - and more importantly high exposure - statements on the value of open source that I've seen to date. The same message from other sectors like 3D printing has been thoroughly muddied by the proprietary side of the market - who have benefited from the expiration of key patents & widespread open source designs.
Fando 12y ago
Finally, progress. A great lesson to all!
- sallyzhp 12y ago
  A great lesson to all tech entrepreneur . http://www.fishgaga.com http://www.fishgaga.com
vacri 12y ago
It's not all give, there is some take. By bringing other manufacturers on board, Tesla gets more assistance in building their recharging network, which is a formidable undertaking. Similarly, the more manufacturers of viable electric vehicles there are, the more mainstream they are, and the larger the overall pie. Tesla does stand to gain something out of sharing.
ihatecommenting 12y ago
Finally Good PR actually means doing something good! hopefully companies/firms will do more advertising, marketing and PR that consists of contributing value to society and CSR. This will hopefully also shake up the awful inefficiencies within charities (not taking anything from the amazing work they do) instead of polishing a turd or diverting money to ads.
tonygan 12y ago
I am more interested in the mentioning of "the spirit of the open source" part. Just image that if one day we are in a world that full of all those "open source electronic cars", to me it will just be too beautiful to see.
- webmaven 12y ago
  Well, seems as though projects like http://www.osvehicle.com/ http://www.osvehicle.com/ and https://localmotors.com/ https://localmotors.com/ will be all over this.
chrisbennet 12y ago
"We have essentially no patents in SpaceX. Our primary long-term competition is in China," said Musk in the interview. "If we published patents, it would be farcical, because the Chinese would just use them as a recipe book." Perhaps Tesla relies on trade secrecy as well?
- omegant 12y ago
  It´s easier to keep a rocket under trade secrecy than a car that can be disassembled and copied as soon as you got your hands on it.
capkutay 12y ago
This may be the wrong venue to say this, but the war against proprietary technology and patents doesn't totally make sense to me. I've read about many of the popular cases where large corporations use patents as a legal tactic to stall competitors, and I understand how it hurts innovation. On the other hand, can't patents protect smaller companies? Open sourcing projects and technology has its case-by-case pros and cons. I agree the increase in open source adoption has had a largely positive impact on the development community. But there seems to be a lot of stigma against 'proprietary' as a whole. How is your company supposed to grow if you can't protect your technology from being easily replicated by competitors?
- psykotic 12y ago
  > On the other hand, can't patents protect smaller companies? Open sourcing projects and technology has its case-by-case pros and cons. I agree the increase in open source adoption has had a largely positive impact on the development community. But there seems to be a lot of stigma against 'proprietary' as a whole. You are conflating several concepts in the space of a paragraph. Can patents protect smaller companies? Maybe, if you have the resources to defend yourself in court. If you are seeking investment, you can file for brain-dead patents as a way to prop up your valuation and quiet investor fears. Sadly, this seems to be the main motivation these days among startups. 'Open source' entails a public release of source code and associated artifacts under a copyright grant with certain freedoms. Traditionally, patent grants have not been a part of these licenses, probably because the pervasiveness of software patents is a relatively new phenomenon. It is only with version 3 of the GPL that it gained explicit patent grant and retaliation clauses, and most other open source licenses still don't have such clauses. But the bigger question is what 'open source' even means in the context of Tesla. It is not like they're going to release detailed plans and blueprints from production facilities and upwards that would allow competitors to make perfect replicas of Tesla cars. 'Proprietary' usually refers to trade secrets. If you file something as a patent, which is a form of public disclosure, it is no longer a trade secret. Most of my peers are strongly against software patents. They don't consider it a moral obligation to open source your company's code or release proprietary information that represents a competitive advantage. In this moral framework, patenting is considered an anti-social act, and releasing source code and proprietary information are considered altruistic acts, ceteris paribus. Note that this doesn't mean that _not_ releasing source code is an anti-social act.
phkahler 12y ago
Some speculation: This is necessary to close a deal on the huge battery plant. Not sure why I didn't think of this immediately given the timing. Reason? The partner(s) want to sell all the capacity even if Tesla can't buy it all, and they want everyone to know there won't be any issue buying Tesla batteries.
lsv1 12y ago
So Telsa Keeps their patents but anyone can use them? What are some cool non-automotive applications for their patents?:)
Istof 12y ago
Is Tesla getting worried of other technologies like fuel cells? http://www.hyundainews.com/us/en-us/Media/PressRelease.aspx?mediaid=40904 http://www.hyundainews.com/us/en-us/Media/PressRelease.aspx?...
reas 12y ago
This is awesome and inspiring even if it's just PR. "Tesla, other companies ..., and the world would all benefit from a common, rapidly-evolving technology platform" Indeed.
sytelus 12y ago
There are almost no instances where patents turned out to be good for community. Wright Brothers stifled all competition by patent litigation causing US to be lightyears behind airplane tech. Edison similarly stifled lighbulb development causing Americans to pay for bad quality at higher prices than European counterparts. Steve Jobs tried to extinguish smartphone revolution causing funny things like removal of fairly generic features like pinch and zoom. One would argue that they might not have been encouraged to invent these stuff if there were no patents. Even if that was true, the fact is that they had already ammassed massive fortunes even before they started patent wars. One would expect these visionary geniuses to let go patents in interest of advancing the state of art after they have gotten more money than they know how to reasonably spend. Elon Musk is the only one doing this here on the top of risking everything on fields that few entrepreneurs would dare. Hats off to him.
- methodology 12y ago
  It would indeed be plain absurd to argue that we needed patents to achieve flight.
briantakita 12y ago
I seem to recall that there is a precedent to this in the microcontroller market in the 1970s and 1980s (and possibly further in the past). Does anyone have link(s) to this business practice.
narendra_l 12y ago
one who takes patent for buttons should learn from tesla's move.
WhoBeI 12y ago
If it was anyone else I'd be a lot more skeptical. There is something different about this guy so he might just mean exactly what we would like him to mean. Mmm hmm, yeah, I'm going to stay positive until proven I shouldn't be.
anvarik 12y ago
lol, in germany if you are an employee in a company like BMW, you are not even allowed take your personal cellphone with you
jermaink 12y ago
So Tesla goes Android.
anuraj 12y ago
Good move! At this point Tesla knows that market needs to be created and it is impossible to achieve unless auto industry works in tandem. Once the market expands, the pie is bigger for everybody.
couchand 12y ago
I can't help but think of Howard Aiken's words, "don't worry about people stealing an idea. If it's original, you will have to ram it down their throats."
rasur 12y ago
What I find hilarious about the discussions going on here is the fact that everyone's generally concentrating on the terrible pain of 'patent abuse', instead of the spectacularly obvious Elephant in the room which is trying to do as much as possible to stop the only home we currently have slowly turning into Venus (the hot, inhospitable planet, not the fictional Goddess of old).
wcchandler 12y ago
Wow, not even more than a day after their meeting with BMW. I wonder if something was said to provoke this announcement.

1999 points by gkoberger 12y ago

Translation: our pinch point is supplier scaling.

The interesting subtext here is that for Tesla to fulfil its potential more support for electric cars in wider society is needed, and while everyone else struggles to build electric cars the infrastructure won't catch up. Opening up, in this sense, could be seen to be a selfish endeavour, but still a positive one, aiming to position Tesla as the Apple of the electric car market, only mildly less litigious.

josephschmoe 12y ago

I'm curious Mr. Musk, does this mean "Give us a call and we will license you our patents at no cost."?

fleitz 12y ago
Phone and ask?

beltex 12y ago

Fun aside: Tesla patent wall in question via Steve Jurvetson https://www.flickr.com/photos/jurvetson/14405402742/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/jurvetson/14405402742/

mwsherman 12y ago

There is no legal covenant here. I imagine Tesla’s definition of “good faith” is “we evaluate on a case by case basis”. Which amounts to “if we like you” and “we reserve the right”. If they wanted these patents to be open source, they would license them explicitly.

icambron 12y ago
I'm curious about this. To what degree is a CEO writing and publicly distributing the statement, "Tesla will not initiate patent lawsuits against anyone who, in good faith, wants to use our technology." legally binding? "In good faith" actually strikes me as reasonably interpretable by a court, so I guess the question is just how much "he said so in a blog post" counts. I'd love to hear a lawyer weigh in on this.
- jonnathanson 12y ago
  "Good faith" is somewhat subjective, and usually it depends on context. Generally speaking, it means acting in an as-stated, forthright, non-deceptive manner. For example, if I agree to explore a partnership with you "in good faith," it means I am serious about the possibility of a partnership. I am not merely wasting your time for the purposes of distracting you, defrauding you, conducting market espionage, or sending false signals. Basically, I am acting "in good faith" when I honestly believe I am doing what I claim to be doing, for the reasons I claim to be doing it. You assume I am acting in good faith, and vice versa, unless a pattern of actions or evidence gives sufficient cause to doubt it. IANAL, but I've dealt with "good faith" issues in business development and licensing contracts more times than I wish I'd had to. There is usually an implicit assumption that all contracts are entered into in good faith unless proven otherwise -- which means I'd almost definitely want to enter into an agreement with Tesla if I were to use their technology.
  - sitkack 12y ago
    Bad faith would be GM patenting an obvious extension to a Tesla patent. What I think Musk is trying to do is poison the electric car patent pool with Milk and Honey. It isn't just Tesla patents that matter, but the whole landscape. Patents stifle the spread and pace of good idea distribution.
    - deleted 12y ago
      [deleted]
  - 12y ago

smackfu 12y ago

"Tesla will not initiate patent lawsuits against anyone who, in good faith, wants to use our technology." What exactly does that little "in good faith" clause mean in there?

oddevan 12y ago
Agreed. I was hoping for a link to a BSD- or Creative Commons-style license, but this was only a reason for not [suing anyone] using the patents (as welcome as that is). [edited for clarification]
McGlockenshire 12y ago
Until clarified, it kind of reads like "independently came up with the same idea, but did not research patents or reach out to us for licensing first."
- chc 12y ago
  That definitely doesn't sound right to me, because it says "wants to use our technology." That implies awareness that one is using Tesla's technology, because otherwise this promise wouldn't mean anything since people who don't believe they're using Tesla's technology wouldn't think they fall under it anyway. I am having trouble working out what it does mean, though. Based on the rest of the article, my best guess is "Does not act in a predatory manner toward other carmakers, such as initiating patent lawsuits of their own." Basically, I think Musk is trying to say that Tesla are willing to cooperate toward the goal of making electric cars a bigger presence if you are, but they don't want people using their patents in conjunction with underhanded tactics to try and monopolize the market.
- dnautics 12y ago
  I think it reads more generally, as in "for any purpose whatsoever except patent litigation".
- oddevan 12y ago
  I feel like (again, until clarified) it's more broad than that. "Wants to use our technology" certainly implies to me that I can seek out Tesla's patent applications and attempt to build using them.

hengheng 12y ago

> Tesla will not initiate patent lawsuits against anyone who, in good faith, wants to use our technology. I'm not familiar with US legislation, but from my perspective this is just Musk on his soap-box making a statement. It's not something I can rely on while building a business that possibly (!) infringes one of Tesla's patents. They may retract their statement and reconsider at any time, especially when times get tough. It's nice to hear this, sure, but I fail to see the meat in this announcement.

gtirloni 12y ago
Are YOU going to built a business around Tesla's patents? If so, you just got a very credible hint that Tesla might be interested in talking to you. Isn't that great? Sometimes I feel doing business in the US is liking playing with your toys while your mom (courts) are watching. No wonder the legal industry is so huge. It has ingrained in people's mind that other people's word are worth nothing. I wish we could look past that... go talk to the guy (or his whatever-department that handles licensing matters). If you're really interested in starting this business, it won't take much of your time.
- hnnewguy 12y ago
  >It has ingrained in people's mind that other people's word are worth nothing. Except that the legal enforcement of property rights is something that separates the First World with the rest of the planet, and is an engine for economic growth.
  - TeMPOraL 12y ago
    Except that such big dependency on legal enforcement and settling everything in court is clearly an American think - we don't see anything near it in Europe.
dragonwriter 12y ago
> I'm not familiar with US legislation, but from my perspective this is just Musk on his soap-box making a statement. It's not something I can rely on while building a business that possibly (!) infringes one of Tesla's patents. They may retract their statement and reconsider at any time, especially when times get tough. The question is whether its a specific enough statement as to reasonably induce reliance, and whether promissory estoppel would apply. It seems to me (and I'm not an expert) like it may be close enough as to seriously threaten Tesla's ability to successfully prosecute suits, and vague enough that anyone else would still be leery about using anything Tesla has patented.

nchlswu 12y ago

Didn't Twitter declare something similar? Is there anything they can do that's binding outside of a declarative 'we won't sue you unless...' statement?

dnautics 12y ago
Yes, they could hand over the patents to RPX, and pay the annual fee; instead of 'as protection' it would be 'as a donation to the public'. Perhaps an odd use of RPX, but it would be really effective. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RPX_Corporation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RPX_Corporation
smackfu 12y ago
IIRC, Twitter's approach was to also give the inventor a transferable license to the patent. That way if Twitter used it offensively, the inventor could independently license the patent to the company who was being sued.
- dnautics 12y ago
  That's very reminiscent of the Spooner vs. Tucker argument about dual ownership of a patent; Spooner conceding to Tucker that co-inventors should each be able to freely license, then Tucker asking if one inventor were to give away the license to the world for free would he be infringing on the other inventor's rights.

aresant 12y ago

In the biotech space there exists a system called "patentleft" which theoretically provides royalty-free licensing of patents with the stipulation that any derivative works / improvements also be licensed under the same terms. Seems like there is good potential to build on the momentum of Tesla's announcement to formalize the process, and answer the questions that I'm sure will emerge in this thread - eg more akin to an Creative Commons (which is very well defined and practical). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patentleft http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patentleft

bthomas 12y ago
How common is this - are there any well known examples? (If so, they're not in wikipedia!)
myth_buster 12y ago
Patentleft is analogous to 'Copyleft' which is a play on words to Copyright.

notdonspaulding 12y ago

These are big words, even coming from the extreme underdog in the auto industry. What exactly is Elon committing to here? Is Tesla planning on releasing any design documentation, or technical specifications or manufacturing process information? It's great that they won't enforce patents in an effort to not stifle innovation, but do they plan on taking any actions that will encourage innovation?

matthewmcg 12y ago
Their patents and patent applications will be published and should (in theory) enable someone to practice the inventions they cover.
thibautx 12y ago
Since many auto manufacturing companies doing R&D and Tesla, having already created technologies good enough to bring to market, there will definitely be incentive for taking action. Tesla has already created technologies to run cars that rival (performance) gasoline cars, and access to those technologies/designs will accelerate their own EV efforts.

bthomas 12y ago

He makes an interesting implicit argument - that it's okay to use patents to block established players from innovating with you, but not to block new startups from challenging you.

sdpurtill 12y ago
He's not saying that. He's arguing that, were Tesla not to take the patents, there was a good chance one of the established auto makers would have taken them. This would have been the problem, as the entrenched players probably would have used the patents to stifle innovation in order to maintain dominance.

jaekwon 12y ago

What can an innovator do besides filing a defensive patent? I've heard of various strategies like publishing the work in as many forums as possible; publishing it on IP.com; filing a patent application and withdrawing it; filing it and pledging; etc. It would be nice if there were a step by step guide written by an attorney--ideally an ex-patent attorney--that goes lists the steps in order of priority/cost/ease for both individual innovators and companies with deeper pockets.

dnautics 12y ago
There used to be a mechanism called the "statutory invention registration" but that got eliminated in the 2013 AIA. This is another option (although kind of outside the box in terms of what RPX normally used for), although it's likely to be pricey: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RPX_Corporation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RPX_Corporation

Arjuna 12y ago

Assuming that this search represents nearly all of them, that is approximately 133 patents: https://www.google.com/?tbm=pts&gws_rd=ssl#q=inassignee:%22Tesla+Motors,+Inc.%22&safe=off&tbm=pts https://www.google.com/?tbm=pts&gws_rd=ssl#q=inassignee:%22T... Edit: Nice catch, peter_l_downs ... I didn't realize that the estimated search result of 6,430 would be off by such a large factor.

peter_l_downs 12y ago
Interestingly, try navigating through – here's the link to page 14: https://www.google.com/?tbm=pts&gws_rd=ssl#q=inassignee%3A%22Tesla+Motors%2C+Inc.%22&safe=off&start=130&tbm=pts https://www.google.com/?tbm=pts&gws_rd=ssl#q=inassignee%3A%2.... I remember reading or being told that Google only estimates how many results there are, and refines the estimate as you navigate further down the list. As of page 14 there seem to be only 133 results; a far cry from 6,430.
- Istof 12y ago
  Apparently they don't estimate, they inflate how many results there are... For example, I never seen a case when their "estimate" was lower then the actual number of results.
  - espadrine 12y ago
    An upper bound is a valid estimation. "Inflating" assumes that they have a good approximation, and that they arbitrarily increase it. I don't think that they do that.
    - Perseids 12y ago
      > An upper bound is a valid estimation. Most people don't expect upper bounds, though, when talking about estimations. I for one would appreciate a less-than or less-than-or-equal sign when this is truly an upper bound, as it gives me a better idea of what to expect of the actual number of results in relation to the estimation.

graeham 12y ago

Sounds to me like the "in good faith" clause is to retain the patents for a defense should someone try to come after Telsa for infringing. Quite an interesting business move and pretty unprecedented as far as I know, at least for a non-software company. Presumably he is hoping that this will encourage improvement to infrastructure. He is also probably thinking he can build higher quality cars and cheaper than others, irrespective of if they are electric or not (probably this is true).

oddevan 12y ago
That is certainly the most plausible reading of that phrase, but it still seems like it could be put into a licence pretty easily, along the lines of "User of these patents hereby relinquishes all claims of infringement against Tesla Motors for any patents the user may own or license".
- jayrox 12y ago
  i read "in good faith" as "you may use these as you wish but don't turn around and try to sue us for using something you hold a patent for" i could be totally off the mark though
  - TeMPOraL 12y ago
    I read it more along the lines of "you may use these as you wish but don't try to turn around and screw the electrification of transportation, harming humanity's future for your own short-term gain". Musk isn't doing it for money after all.
    - fragsworth 12y ago
      > Musk isn't doing it for money after all. No, it's for money. It's the charging stations. There aren't enough of them, and it's the biggest problem they have. Tesla needs the big manufacturers to build electric cars so they will put charging stations everywhere.

ISL 12y ago

Without an explicit licensing agreement, one should consider the fate of Troy, even if Tesla's present intentions are good.

colanderman 12y ago

FFS, change the title back to what it was submitted with! "All Our Patent Are Belong To You" makes no sense out of context. At least the original title said something about Tesla Motors.

chc 12y ago
This has been discussed a lot over the past few years. The title-changing policy is very widely disliked and leads to a lot of clearly poor results like this, but the mods are completely uninterested in changing it, so there it is. I don't know why we're even allowed to write titles anymore — it may just as well be populated by an automatic HTTP request.
- colanderman 12y ago
  Yes I know, I've been here for many years. It just feels good to vent sometimes (at the cost of some karma).
fuddle 12y ago
Mr Musk, I expected better grammar from you.
- peterarmstrong 12y ago
  It's a meme: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_your_base http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_your_base
  - fuddle 12y ago
    Right, I'll get my coat..
  - larrys 12y ago
    Thanks for pointing that out (I didn't know that). That said I think it's a bit immature and out of place in a public blog post (which will no doubt be repeated elsewhere) for such a visible company that wishes to be taken seriously.

DogeDogeDoge 12y ago

Pretty awesome :) if it will not be empty words we maybe could have much more momentum in the field of electric cars.

ekanes 12y ago

Volvo famously acted similarly with their invention of the seatbelt.

swimfar 12y ago
It was actually their invention of the three-point seatbelt in 1959. http://www.wired.com/2009/08/strapping-success-the-3-point-seatbelt-turns-50/ http://www.wired.com/2009/08/strapping-success-the-3-point-s...

hatred 12y ago

Elon Musk #Respect

ww520 12y ago

This is a pretty good gesture. It will be good to spurt innovation since smaller players in the area don't need to worry about infringing. What about the defensive measure? To defend against being sued. It would be good if Tesla pools the patents with others to form an "open patent" club where all the interested parties can join and use the patent to defend against infringement lawsuits.

lilsunnybee 12y ago
Think you mean 'spur' not 'spurt'. Sorry to be a pedant! Great points. :-)
- ww520 12y ago
  Thanks for pointing out the error. I'll pay closer attention next time I use it. :)

supergeek133 12y ago

Perfect move by Tesla, they've hit a wall on progress that the big auto companies and government will allow. Let's see what a mob of similar armed companies will do.

sidcool 12y ago

Inspite of all the negative reactions here, I applaud this move. The preceding statement to the one with 'good faith' is pretty important >"If we clear a path to the creation of compelling electric vehicles, but then lay intellectual property landmines behind us to inhibit others, we are acting in a manner contrary to that goal"

larrys 12y ago

Does anyone know if Musk requires non competes of Tesla's employees? Separately using the "All Our Patent Are Belong To You" meme (as has been pointed out below by peterarmstrong ) appears to be a clear "in your face" to "the man". Most people I would imagine aren't aware of this meme (I wasn't) and using it in a public press release seems a bit odd to me.

iancarroll 12y ago

Are there any legal documents that certify this? I'm not a lawyer, but would this post actually count as a "license"?

pnathan 12y ago

I see this as essentially an open note to hardware tech companies asking them to come by and talk about licensing and interop deals without worrying that Tesla will be a hardcase about any possible IP infringement.

loganu 12y ago
That may not have been their intention, but that's what came to mind for me as well.

ibrad 12y ago

This is a bold move, and of course open to interpretation. But I am still optimistic about it. You can argue why they have patents in the first place, remember that if they didn't or sold it to a third party it will come back to bite their ass. It is much better to hold the patent and allow others to used without being worried about getting sued. I am sure the big auto makers may consider taking advantage of this situation to crush tesla, but Elon Musk is known for not getting distracted by the petty things.

ajsharp 12y ago

Interesting point: > At Tesla, however, we felt compelled to create patents out of concern that the big car companies would copy our technology and then use their massive manufacturing, sales and marketing power to overwhelm Tesla. We couldn’t have been more wrong. The unfortunate reality is the opposite: electric car programs (or programs for any vehicle that doesn’t burn hydrocarbons) at the major manufacturers are small to non-existent, constituting an average of far less than 1% of their total vehicle sales. I read this as effectively saying that it's easy for them to take this step, relative to companies in other industries (Apple, Google, Amazon, et al) because none of Tesla's competitors even have the ability to make use of their technology. Makes me wonder if Musk would have done the same thing if Tesla were a software company.

nolok 12y ago
That's because he is being disingenuous there, he is not talking about money invested in R&D but percentage of electric cars in total sales. Those companies have an established market share which correspond to a massive number of non-electric car sales, it is not surprising in the least that the new developing area they are coming in (electric) is being very small right now. That's doesn't mean they aren't doing a lot of R&D or lack the ability to uses those patents.

ma2rten 12y ago

> Tesla will not initiate patent lawsuits against anyone who, in good faith, wants to use our technology. What does that even mean? How do you make cars in bad faith?

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

Alex_MJ 12y ago

(1) I love this. (2) Having limited legal knowledge, I'm curious what he means with "a lottery ticket to a lawsuit". Is he indicating that patenting something would make a company more likely to get sued? My basic understanding is the opposite, that patents yield protection from lawsuits rather than create exposure to them. Is this flawed?

TeMPOraL 12y ago
Looking at software patents, I read (2) as saying that a patent is a lottery ticket, in which winning tickets are the patents someone accidentally infringed, thus opening a way for you to sue them out of their money.

rayiner 12y ago

I love Elon Musk, and kudos to them for doing this, but it's useful to read between the lines: > Yesterday, there was a wall of Tesla patents in the lobby of our Palo Alto headquarters. This is consistent with my view of how engineers in the traditional disciplines view patents. > At Tesla, however, we felt compelled to create patents out of concern that the big car companies would copy our technology and then use their massive manufacturing, sales and marketing power to overwhelm Tesla This is the precise thing that patents are designed to prevent: to keep the market from turning into a race to see who can outsource most efficiently to China and inundate the public most completely with advertising. > The unfortunate reality is the opposite: electric car programs (or programs for any vehicle that doesn’t burn hydrocarbons) at the major manufacturers are small to non-existent, constituting an average of far less than 1% of their total vehicle sales. So the other manufacturers didn't copy Tesla's technology, either because they are incapable of it or because they didn't feel there was enough money in it relative to their traditional markets. > We believe that Tesla, other companies making electric cars, and the world would all benefit from a common, rapidly-evolving technology platform. In other words, it helps Tesla more to have lots of companies developing electric cars to push back on regulatory barriers and consumer perceptions than it does for them to protect themselves against larger manufacturers copying their technology. Also buried in here is the assumption that Tesla is, now, far enough ahead of its potential competitors that it doesn't matter if they copy the technology. I think this is the right move for Tesla, but there's a lot of dynamics at play that have nothing to do with the usefulness of patents in general.

deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
- rayiner 12y ago
  The free-rider effect is not a "post-facto rationalization." It's rooted in a strong economic basis: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_rider_problem http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_rider_problem.
wyager 12y ago
>This is the precise thing that patents are designed to prevent: to keep the market from turning into a race to see who can outsource most efficiently to China and inundate the public most completely with advertising. I have absolutely no idea how you possibly came to this conclusion.

natural219 12y ago

If you want to track the death of the cultural vision of Silicon Valley -- the belief that some people, at least, can rise above petty human squabbling and competition and are legitimately working to better humanity -- look no further than this thread. Every top comment is a skeptical one. "This is clearly a great PR move, but has no teeth." "How do you enforce this guarantee?" Etc. These are reasonable questions, but as Shaw said, all progress comes from unreasonable men. I cannot help but be fundamentally depressed as I read these comments. In my view, Elon Musk has, moreso than any other human except maybe Bill Gates, given every absolute inch of human effort and genius to fight to solve the world's biggest problems. And all we have for him, after benefiting freely from the fruit of his labor, is skepticism. We want more. It's not enough. It's never enough. Yes, Tesla Motors is a company operating in a media-hyped 2014 America. I know some of you are butthurt that he engages in the same "dishonest" PR tactics that other companies do. GET THE FUCK OVER IT. The end product he's producing will save humanity. That all of America has not rallied behind Musk and Tesla as the most important movement and achievement in the last 100 years of human history absolutely blows my mind. Not only do we not recognize his goals or his achievements, we actively try and bring him down and shit on his accomplishments. "Well, they invented a pretty cool electric motor, sure, but they were kind of dishonest in that one press release that one time." Go fuck yourself. I want to say "I'm done with Hacker News", but we know that's not true. I'm supremely disappointed in all of you. Godspeed, Musk. I thought this was a great announcement, and I'm behind you 100%. I just hope you can finish your work before our shitty, myopic, destructive society tears you down. Here's to faith.

TeMPOraL 12y ago
This. You captured perfectly my own sentiment towards this thread, and Tesla-related threads in general. Really, pretty much every single thing Musk does proves that he's trying to honestly help solve biggest problems of humanity, and still people disect his every word in order to find some way to say that yes, he's as selfish bastard as everyone else. I strongly hope that he doesn't give a single damn about such opinions. It would be a shame to see those projects derailed by petty skepticism. Come to think of it, maybe we, as a civilisation, as a culture, are just proving that we don't deserve to live, since not only can't we be bothered to fix the mess we've made, we actively make it difficult for the few of us who want to save us from our own stupidity? > I just hope you can finish your work before our shitty, myopic, distructive society tears you down. Here's to faith. Here's to faith.

vonsydov 12y ago

Holy shite.

kirk21 12y ago

If you want to learn more about Elon Musk, you can start here: http://everyelonmuskvideo.tumblr.com/ http://everyelonmuskvideo.tumblr.com/

sallyzhp 12y ago
Respect

dmritard96 12y ago

I wonder if they will consider more open source also?

volandovengo 12y ago

How can you not love this guy?

Shivetya 12y ago
I do love the humor, that sets them even further apart from the old crew

siscia 12y ago

You want to make money or you want to change the world ? I really liked Tesla here, there is the "good faith" deal, but still...

iamjdg 12y ago

this is another marketing ploy. this is also the beginning of Elon preparing for his next career move. Elon's realizing he has hit the technical and economic limits of all battery vehicles and can't deliver. now that he has given away all his patents, he will make moves to distance himself from Tesla. he will hand over the reins to someone else. step away. start another unrelated business. and when tesla crashes and burns (no pun intended) he will be able to say it wasn't his fault, that he left them with all the tools and "they" couldn't make it happen. in the executive world they call it the "sideways shuffle" or the "Teflon shoulder".

andrewtbham 12y ago

Is the title a reference to "all your base are belong to us?"

andrewtbham 12y ago
To answer my own question, yes and the Elon Musk reference is already added in wikipedia. That was quick. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_your_base_are_belong_to_us http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_your_base_are_belong_to_us
izzydata 12y ago
I found it pretty weird that someone like Elon would make such a reference. The site just looks too professional for the out of place internet meme.

samstave 12y ago

So, would this mean that Tesla would be open to a cottage industry where anyone could start a company building a different body type on top of their drivetrain? More specifically - could you just buy the S chassis/drivetrain from tesla and build say a delivery van body on top of it?

nbouscal 12y ago

Alex Tabarrok comments on this: "I believe that this announcement will be discussed in business schools for years to come much like Henry Ford’s announcement of the $5 a day wage." http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2014/06/tesla-says-all-our-patent-are-belong-to-you.html http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2014/06/tes...

danielweber 12y ago
Just like everyone remembers when the US bought up and public-domained all the aeronautic patents. EDIT I should explicitly say that I am being sarcastic. Mr Tabarrok is believing what he wants to be true.
- jeffh 12y ago
  Most people are actually unaware of Ford's "innovations" on pay, or the reasoning behind them, but that does not dilute the profound impact the actions had.
  - superuser2 12y ago
    It's 4th grade US history curriculum.
    - btbuildem 12y ago
      most people don't live in the US
      - vertis 12y ago
        Lies!
      - superuser2 12y ago
        Approximately 100% of people under the jurisdiction of US patent law and influenced by the American auto industry do.
    - 12y ago

notastartup 12y ago

Elon Musk is a heartthrob.

notastartup 12y ago
looks like anti-Musk zombies at it with the downvotes in the comments

beamatronic 12y ago

Does Tesla want the big automakers to build cars with equal capabilities as the Model S? Assuming they did so, would they not be more cost-competitive due to economies of scale? Their mission of promoting sustainable transporation might be at odds with their fiduciary duty to their shareholders then. If Tesla really wanted to see the big auto makers build more capable electric cars, AND if they also want to be a profitable enterprise, THEN, the best course of action would be to OEM the powertrain parts that they have already invested in inventing and building.

mcb3k 12y ago
Note that Tesla owns the super charging stations, and is also aiming to stand up a large scale battery production facility. Assuming that the patents would lead to other auto-manufacturers to use the same standards that Tesla uses, this would mean that the would need to either build their own batteries, or buy them from Tesla. Since Tesla is making the Gigafactory so that the price of batteries will drop, it's likely to be cheaper to buy them from Tesla than standing up their own infrastructure to handle it. So, even if they aren't selling as many cars as the big automakers, they can still sell batteries and access to the super charging stations to the big players. In any case, I think a sufficient amount of people would probably still buy a Tesla because of the brand recognition, even if the big auto-makers were making solid electric cars.

patio11 12y ago

So an informal non-aggression pact is nice, but absolutely no automobile manufacturer would rely on that when a new car costs a significant fraction of a billion dollars to bring to market. (If I were a cynical man, I might think this didn't escape their notice.) If it were me, and the true intent was to distribute the Tesla patents as widely as possible, I would have said "Tesla pledges to license its entire patent portfolio, on a worldwide non-exclusive no-royalty basis, to any interested party. We will ask for consideration in the amount of $1 for a 99 year license. Your lawyers and accountants can reassure you that these sort of symbolic commitments hold up in court. They'll also no doubt ask to see the full terms, which are about as boring as you'd expect, and which are available from our Legal Department."

andrewfong 12y ago
If I were Tesla, I'd also request that the licensing party grant a reciprocal bulk license to Tesla as well. Or, barring that, that Tesla reserves the right to revoke the license if you initiate a patent lawsuit against it.
- yonran 12y ago
  Does there exist such a patent license with no security holes? I would imagine that it would read, “License will be revoked if you 1) Sue me for patent infringement. 2) Sell a patent to a company that sues me for patent infringement (like Intellectual Ventures does). 3) Sponsor the development of a patent, and the owner of the patent sues me for patent infringement. 4) Contract with a patent pool that sues me for patent infringement. 5) Sue my partners or customers for patent infringement (like Apple vs. Google’s partners)...” and so on ad infinitum.
  - stcredzero 12y ago
    One would also have clauses to ensure that the products/devices produced under license would not be designed for lock-in and be compatible with electric cars from other companies.

askar_yu 12y ago

"All Our Patent Are Belong To You" this sentence sounds grammatically incorrect to my non-native-English ear (O_o)

bdcs 12y ago
You are correct. "All Our Patent Are Belong To You" is a reference to this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_your_base_are_belong_to_us http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_your_base_are_belong_to_us FYI, in correct English the sentence would read, "All of our patents belong to you."

nullz 12y ago

If I were building a giant battery factory, I would also encourage others to make electric cars.

Ryel 12y ago
Or if you wanted to be John D Rockefeller, rather than Henry Ford.

yaddayadda 12y ago

I wonder if this will spur WikiSpeed (an open source car group) to also support an electric engine module? http://wikispeed.org/ http://wikispeed.org/

NicoJuicy 12y ago

It i were Google (and manufacturing cars) or Volvo (who also has a impressive driverless car: http://goo.gl/qWU7DS http://goo.gl/qWU7DS ). I would go all in on this. A niche product (in the current condition) and usable driverless electric cars. You aren't really competing with Tesla, because you have a total different audience.

reiichiroh 12y ago

Love the Zero Wing reference.

hyp0 12y ago

I love Elon's PR. He reframes himself as a champion of humanity, above ego competition, to make you feel good (and I do!). He simultaneously criticises the competition, in those terms. And I also agree he was right to fear the better-resourced incumbents to duplicate his tech for free, unfounded though it was. He doesn't mention this, but at this point, he is also well ahead of his real competition (fellow disruptors) in market terms, and so it won't harm him to release these patents.

hyp0 12y ago
It's weird, I always get downvoted on HN for saying I love Elon, and analysing what he's doing. Something similar used to happen with Apple posts.
- hyp0 12y ago
  See what I mean?

codewiz 12y ago

Funny how the companies with the best engineering also tend to be those with the best business ethics. Kudos to Tesla for being once again disruptive and innovative in the risk-averse and ailing automotive industry.

haberman 12y ago

That's great. I wonder if they will do a similar thing with their proprietary supercharger plug. They'd need a way to charge non-Tesla drivers for the energy though.

briantakita 12y ago

But, but, how will Tesla find the incentive to innovate without patents?

syedzbadar 12y ago

I really admire Elon Musk--a lot. His insight that Tesla’s real competition isn't the Fords, Chryslers, etc., but rather it’s the momentum behind gasoline cars. And, if that momentum is the actual competition, then that momentum/competition can be broken by open sourcing Tesla’s technology… I think that his specific move on patents (as it relates to the auto industry) is an excellent example of having the perfect balance of having customer obsession and being competition aware.

bld 12y ago

This is one of the most clear & succinct - and more importantly high exposure - statements on the value of open source that I've seen to date. The same message from other sectors like 3D printing has been thoroughly muddied by the proprietary side of the market - who have benefited from the expiration of key patents & widespread open source designs.

Fando 12y ago

Finally, progress. A great lesson to all!

sallyzhp 12y ago
A great lesson to all tech entrepreneur . http://www.fishgaga.com http://www.fishgaga.com

vacri 12y ago

It's not all give, there is some take. By bringing other manufacturers on board, Tesla gets more assistance in building their recharging network, which is a formidable undertaking. Similarly, the more manufacturers of viable electric vehicles there are, the more mainstream they are, and the larger the overall pie. Tesla does stand to gain something out of sharing.

ihatecommenting 12y ago

Finally Good PR actually means doing something good! hopefully companies/firms will do more advertising, marketing and PR that consists of contributing value to society and CSR. This will hopefully also shake up the awful inefficiencies within charities (not taking anything from the amazing work they do) instead of polishing a turd or diverting money to ads.

tonygan 12y ago

I am more interested in the mentioning of "the spirit of the open source" part. Just image that if one day we are in a world that full of all those "open source electronic cars", to me it will just be too beautiful to see.

webmaven 12y ago
Well, seems as though projects like http://www.osvehicle.com/ http://www.osvehicle.com/ and https://localmotors.com/ https://localmotors.com/ will be all over this.

chrisbennet 12y ago

"We have essentially no patents in SpaceX. Our primary long-term competition is in China," said Musk in the interview. "If we published patents, it would be farcical, because the Chinese would just use them as a recipe book." Perhaps Tesla relies on trade secrecy as well?

omegant 12y ago
It´s easier to keep a rocket under trade secrecy than a car that can be disassembled and copied as soon as you got your hands on it.

capkutay 12y ago

This may be the wrong venue to say this, but the war against proprietary technology and patents doesn't totally make sense to me. I've read about many of the popular cases where large corporations use patents as a legal tactic to stall competitors, and I understand how it hurts innovation. On the other hand, can't patents protect smaller companies? Open sourcing projects and technology has its case-by-case pros and cons. I agree the increase in open source adoption has had a largely positive impact on the development community. But there seems to be a lot of stigma against 'proprietary' as a whole. How is your company supposed to grow if you can't protect your technology from being easily replicated by competitors?

psykotic 12y ago
> On the other hand, can't patents protect smaller companies? Open sourcing projects and technology has its case-by-case pros and cons. I agree the increase in open source adoption has had a largely positive impact on the development community. But there seems to be a lot of stigma against 'proprietary' as a whole. You are conflating several concepts in the space of a paragraph. Can patents protect smaller companies? Maybe, if you have the resources to defend yourself in court. If you are seeking investment, you can file for brain-dead patents as a way to prop up your valuation and quiet investor fears. Sadly, this seems to be the main motivation these days among startups. 'Open source' entails a public release of source code and associated artifacts under a copyright grant with certain freedoms. Traditionally, patent grants have not been a part of these licenses, probably because the pervasiveness of software patents is a relatively new phenomenon. It is only with version 3 of the GPL that it gained explicit patent grant and retaliation clauses, and most other open source licenses still don't have such clauses. But the bigger question is what 'open source' even means in the context of Tesla. It is not like they're going to release detailed plans and blueprints from production facilities and upwards that would allow competitors to make perfect replicas of Tesla cars. 'Proprietary' usually refers to trade secrets. If you file something as a patent, which is a form of public disclosure, it is no longer a trade secret. Most of my peers are strongly against software patents. They don't consider it a moral obligation to open source your company's code or release proprietary information that represents a competitive advantage. In this moral framework, patenting is considered an anti-social act, and releasing source code and proprietary information are considered altruistic acts, ceteris paribus. Note that this doesn't mean that _not_ releasing source code is an anti-social act.

phkahler 12y ago

Some speculation: This is necessary to close a deal on the huge battery plant. Not sure why I didn't think of this immediately given the timing. Reason? The partner(s) want to sell all the capacity even if Tesla can't buy it all, and they want everyone to know there won't be any issue buying Tesla batteries.

lsv1 12y ago

So Telsa Keeps their patents but anyone can use them? What are some cool non-automotive applications for their patents?:)

Istof 12y ago

Is Tesla getting worried of other technologies like fuel cells? http://www.hyundainews.com/us/en-us/Media/PressRelease.aspx?mediaid=40904 http://www.hyundainews.com/us/en-us/Media/PressRelease.aspx?...

reas 12y ago

This is awesome and inspiring even if it's just PR. "Tesla, other companies ..., and the world would all benefit from a common, rapidly-evolving technology platform" Indeed.

sytelus 12y ago

There are almost no instances where patents turned out to be good for community. Wright Brothers stifled all competition by patent litigation causing US to be lightyears behind airplane tech. Edison similarly stifled lighbulb development causing Americans to pay for bad quality at higher prices than European counterparts. Steve Jobs tried to extinguish smartphone revolution causing funny things like removal of fairly generic features like pinch and zoom. One would argue that they might not have been encouraged to invent these stuff if there were no patents. Even if that was true, the fact is that they had already ammassed massive fortunes even before they started patent wars. One would expect these visionary geniuses to let go patents in interest of advancing the state of art after they have gotten more money than they know how to reasonably spend. Elon Musk is the only one doing this here on the top of risking everything on fields that few entrepreneurs would dare. Hats off to him.

methodology 12y ago
It would indeed be plain absurd to argue that we needed patents to achieve flight.

briantakita 12y ago

I seem to recall that there is a precedent to this in the microcontroller market in the 1970s and 1980s (and possibly further in the past). Does anyone have link(s) to this business practice.

narendra_l 12y ago

one who takes patent for buttons should learn from tesla's move.

WhoBeI 12y ago

If it was anyone else I'd be a lot more skeptical. There is something different about this guy so he might just mean exactly what we would like him to mean. Mmm hmm, yeah, I'm going to stay positive until proven I shouldn't be.

anvarik 12y ago

lol, in germany if you are an employee in a company like BMW, you are not even allowed take your personal cellphone with you

jermaink 12y ago

So Tesla goes Android.

anuraj 12y ago

Good move! At this point Tesla knows that market needs to be created and it is impossible to achieve unless auto industry works in tandem. Once the market expands, the pie is bigger for everybody.

couchand 12y ago

I can't help but think of Howard Aiken's words, "don't worry about people stealing an idea. If it's original, you will have to ram it down their throats."

rasur 12y ago

What I find hilarious about the discussions going on here is the fact that everyone's generally concentrating on the terrible pain of 'patent abuse', instead of the spectacularly obvious Elephant in the room which is trying to do as much as possible to stop the only home we currently have slowly turning into Venus (the hot, inhospitable planet, not the fictional Goddess of old).

wcchandler 12y ago

Wow, not even more than a day after their meeting with BMW. I wonder if something was said to provoke this announcement.