Ezekiel wrote:
"Phil Da Lick!" <phil_the_lick@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
message news:zrSdnQo2z5vhkf_UnZ2dnUVZ8rSdnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Ezekiel wrote:
"Phil Da Lick!" <phil_the_lick@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
message news:S_udnSlnKZPBmP_UnZ2dnUVZ8qydnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Ezekiel wrote:
"Phil Da Lick!" <phil_the_lick@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
message news:PLKdnXotOd1tnf_UnZ2dnUVZ8tLinZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
The Lost Packet wrote:
Phil Da Lick! wrote:
The Lost Packet wrote:
So let me get this straight, the /inventor/ does not "own" his
own idea?
Not when he's technically employed by a university and inventing on
/their/ time.
Employed by a university? That's a novel interpretation of the
learning process.
it's part of the student contract, and it's perfectly legal. If
you're
There atre lots of things that are "perfectly legal". That doesn't
make them morally right.
But this isn't one of those things. If someone is hired by and works
for a company. And that company pays the persons salary and provides
them with the tools (computers, labs, etc) that enables them to invent
something. Then anything that the person invents while working for the
employer belongs to the company.... and not the person.
It's insane to think that if a company like Pfizer spends millions in
research and building a state-of-the-art laboratory that when some
researchers invents a new drug... on their dollar working on company
time, it's ridiculous to think that the invention "belongs" to the
person and not the company that financed the discovery of the drug.
All well and good but universities and schools are not companies.
In most ways they are. They are in the /business/ of education and many
of these schools make billions of dollars in tax-free income. And they
don't have to pay property tax on their land/buildings either in most
states. Check out the massive stockpile of cash that a school like
Harvard University has. It enough to put most "companies" to shame.
Education can be a very lucrative and profitable business.
Other than that most larger universities do have a "research center" or
whatever they want to call it. They employ doctors and scientists and
function just like a normal private sector company would.
See Homer's reply. Educational institutions are not companies. Students
are not employees.
I couldn't care less what Homer's ridiculous point of view is. The very fact
that universities are grabbing patents and attempting to profit from them
shows that they are indeed functioning like a company. Education is a big
business and these "companies" function and act just like a company. They
grab patents in order to generate additional revenue.
You keep claiming that they shouldn't do this (take patents) because that's
what a company would do and claim they're not a company. Well... the fact
that they behave exactly like a corporation pretty much makes them a
corporation doesn't it?
And the fact that educational establishments are funded by the taxpayer
should mean that they shouldn't act like companies.
|
|
