In article <355F63AE.AA537267 at dcr.net>, Teel Adams <coltom at dcr.net> wrote:
>react at ix.netcom.com wrote:
>>> Marc Andelman wrote:
>>>> The government, of course, provides money for research and does not
>> exclude patenting as a legitimate use of these funds. Am I correct, or
>> does the government provide funding explicitely allocated to patent
>> generation?
Good point! I fell same way goverment funding is allocated to parent
generation than patent generation. If a guy is government employee,
his/her daughter or son gets easy job at federal government level..
that is the funding for parents for generations..Sorry ..that is
that I see around myself...Government should be smaller, smaller..
who cares patenting?
>>I am of the opinion, that you are seeing an overcompensation from
>government agencies and the Congress. In the Republican's frenzy to cut
>funding, most agencies have taken a more "user pays" strategy.
>Publications, software, even data, are now sellable and sources of
>income.
>>Rather silly, really. I prefer the old days when all government research
>and innovation was free to all. Of course, many incredibly useful
>government inventions were taken over by the private sector, patented,
>and used to make huge amounts of money. Bioremediation is a glaring
>example.
>>I would think, the compromise would be to have enlightened congressmen
>that fund research accordingly, and then make the research free and
>available, but also unpatentable.
>>I do know, that some of my A.I algorythms that I designed for detecting
>Medical fraud, were latter used on commercial systems, and I don't get
>squat in royalties. Not even a Christmas card.
>
--
