Marc Andelman wrote:
> mark wrote:
> > and my writieng are the opinion of another academic lackey that is happy
> > that he ain't no industry lackey where my ideas couldn't be patented
> > for my gain, but here they can. ITs stupic to give that up inthis age of
> > biotech given my background. small start-ups is the way to go!
> > markH
> YOU DO VIEW ACADEMIC PATENTS AS AN ENTITLEMENT.
ENtitlement-are you spouting those buxx words again? Hey if you feel you are
then I definately am.
> Everyone who spends their own money to build a company is a fool in
> your book, as you cyncially accept publically funded work into
> patents with your name on it.
Yeah--'cause its mine! WOUld you prohibit artists that recieved a grant to
write a book not be allowed to profit from the sale of the book?
> However, you are ultimately stealing from my family
> by stealing from the public. A self righteous thief is what you are.
How am I stealing? THe govt awarded money for research which leads to a
treatment that NO company had the wherewithall to complete. I do the
research I do the thinking I do the investing in the start-up I take all the
risk, the govt none. why shouldn't i be allowed to play by the rules set
up by the capitalist?
> Also, in a company you can have stock options . You can also found
> your own firm. You are a thief because you have no imagination.
> Academics are not entrepreneurs. They take no personal risk at all.
excuse me? ONe could argue that every experiment is a risk, every pursued
idea a risk, coming to philly was a risk. that just stupid.
> Many have fat cat jobs. The people holding the bag are the old
> ladies swindled by the failures of flakey univeristy start ups.
investing in start-ups is risky,
> Marc Andelman