A fellow in a seminar yesterday familiar with Solyndra and other alt-energy debacles made an observation about the venture capitalists and their mania for intellectual property rights in the projects they fund. On the front end, as we all know, it is about a positive protection of the idea so the monopolistic benefits may be secured. This participant's observation was there is the back side to, should the project fail, some or all of the investment may be recovered by using the venture's IPR to shake down other players in the field with a negative use of the IPR.
Which leads me to wonder if there are cases where there are projects that are viable, but the csh that can be yielded from negatively wielded IPR is superior to the positive uses, and so plugs are pulled on the marginally viable in order that more revenue may be realized by the negative use of IPR.
Who cares, the system is bad enough, it needs to be swept clean away.
Feel free to forward this by email to three of your friends.
Which leads me to wonder if there are cases where there are projects that are viable, but the csh that can be yielded from negatively wielded IPR is superior to the positive uses, and so plugs are pulled on the marginally viable in order that more revenue may be realized by the negative use of IPR.
Who cares, the system is bad enough, it needs to be swept clean away.
Feel free to forward this by email to three of your friends.
0 comments:
Post a Comment