[MURG] Uploading IP (intellectual property)

[cat13 at illrepute.org]

"Yan King Yin" <y.k.y at lycos.com> writes:

> From: cat13 at illrepute.org
> 
> >There is a hope that MU researchers create intellectual value (software,
> >research).
> >Many argue for enhancing that value by keeping open anything created.
> >You propose that we seek a more immediate (short-term) return on that
> >value by closing and selling it.
> 
> But how do you create a reward system when you don't protect
> your assets with IP?

The source of our difference is in considering the products of research
to be privately owned assets.

What's the reward system for?

> >I believe that making information proprietary is, without exception,
> >detrimental to progress in the long run, even if there is an intent that
> >the duration of proprietaryness (?) is intended to be temporary.  I am
> >fully willing to accept the argument that that detriment can be offset by
> >short-term gain, but I regard proprietaryness as a worst-case scenario.
> >In other words, is there any other way we can possibly achieve whatever
> >short-term gain we need?  To answer that, it seems we should determine
> >our need: what costs do we need to cover?  What would you like to
> >accomplish and what do we need to accomplish it?
> 
> I don't really agree with your criticisim of IP as detrimental,
> I think that's one-dimensional thinking (ie a single objective
> function such as goodness of end-product) without appreciating
> the complexities of economics.

I would be grateful if you were to enlighten me with your superior grasp
of the complexities of economics.

> A simplistic argument that says
> this and that approach is better will not work, unless you do
> an extensive comparison of federal funding, private funding, and
> whatever open models. This requires lots of work.

Since you're not seriously suggesting that any governmental or private
backer will fund the entire uploading project, could you clarify what
you are suggesting?

If you're suggesting that a subset of the required research is done and
kept proprietary, who will pick it up and do more?  Since it's proprietary,
the only group that can further it is the group that started it, which
leads to a single group funding the entirety of the project, which is not
reasonable.

> As for the requirements of MU, I think we already have a rough
> estimation of what is needed.

So you're talking about accumulating funds for the entire project?

> The costs of the whole project
> will be at least comparable to the human genome project

I would think the costs would be orders of magnitude greater, but there
are probably other people here far more qualified than me to provide an
estimate.