Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Directive 10-289

Point Three. All patents and copyrights, pertaining to any devices, inventions, formulas, processes and works of any nature whatsoever, shall be turned over to the nation as a patriotic emergency gift by means of Gift Certificates to be signed voluntarily by the owners of all such patents and copyrights. The Unification Board shall then license the use of such patents and copyrights to all applicants, equally and without discrimination, for the purpose of eliminating monopolistic practices, discarding obsolete products and making the best available to the whole nation. No trademarks, brand names or copyrighted titles shall be used. Every formerly patented product shall be known by a new name and sold by all manufacturers under the same name, such name to be selected by the Unification Board. All private trademarks and brand names are hereby abolished.

1 posted on 02/19/2024 6:12:21 PM PST by Tench_Coxe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Tench_Coxe
The only difference is that they take federal funding, DC now has its hooks in you.

So while the Bayh-Dole Act was initially well intentioned, the law of unintended consequences holds again.

2 posted on 02/19/2024 6:16:22 PM PST by Tench_Coxe (The woke were surprised by the reaction to the Bud Light fiasco. May there be many more surprises)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Tench_Coxe

https://www.conservapedia.com/Directive_10-289


3 posted on 02/19/2024 6:17:14 PM PST by fishtank (The denial of original sin is the root of liberalism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Tench_Coxe

Breaking up monopolies is one thing but this thing has a certain commie feel to it.


4 posted on 02/19/2024 6:19:32 PM PST by jimwatx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Tench_Coxe

I don’t know who’s right in this particular dust-up. But here’s one thing I know for sure. When you weaken patent protections, you take away a key reason to innovate, to take a risk.

Always.


5 posted on 02/19/2024 6:20:42 PM PST by Leaning Right (The steal is real.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Tench_Coxe

and if anyone objects, just fine them 400 million dollars

...its the democrat way


6 posted on 02/19/2024 6:22:05 PM PST by farmguy ( )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Tench_Coxe

He is targeting Tesla.


7 posted on 02/19/2024 6:24:27 PM PST by Zathras
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Tench_Coxe
I'm reminded of the vast amounts of taxpayer money that is spent into universities and grants that help produce pharmaceuticals.

A large percentage of such resources helps to produce these private patents that ‘big’ pharm turns around and resells to America at the highest possible price, even they we paid for such research and development.

I can easily see where a nationalist would be upset at the prospect of the USA subsidizing the world.

9 posted on 02/19/2024 6:31:14 PM PST by Theoria
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Tench_Coxe

Don’t take “grants” which have strings attached. Hillsdale College is looking smart right now.


10 posted on 02/19/2024 6:35:44 PM PST by Alvin Diogenes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Tench_Coxe

Legal cover for what’s already been sold to, or stolen by, China.


11 posted on 02/19/2024 6:39:24 PM PST by Empire_of_Liberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Tench_Coxe

From an earlier article:
“Hochul joined John Catsimatidis on “The Cats Roundtable” on WABC 770 AM, where she was asked if other New York businesspeople should be worried that if “they can do that to the former president, they can do that to anybody.”

“I think that this is really an extraordinary, unusual circumstance that the law-abiding and rule-following New Yorkers who are business people have nothing to worry about, because they’re very different than Donald Trump and his behavior,” Hochul responded.”
Yep, businesses have nothing to worry about from the Democrats.


12 posted on 02/19/2024 6:56:46 PM PST by MCF (If my home can't be my Castle, then it will be my Alamo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Tench_Coxe

next step abolish private property


13 posted on 02/19/2024 6:58:07 PM PST by californian by choice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Tench_Coxe

Yep.

And prepare for shortages even more severe, once the government gets involved.


15 posted on 02/19/2024 7:01:23 PM PST by rlmorel ("The stigma for being wrong is gone, as long as you're wrong for the right side." (Clarice Feldman))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Tench_Coxe

I think each drug needs to be judged on its own merits.

Let me give you one example. The androgen deprivation drug Lupron, to treat prostate cancer, had its patent expire many years ago. However, the manufacturer made a very slight change and got a new patent, which restarted the clock.

The government paid for all the expenses to develope the drug, so the patent was owned by the FDA. The FDA then sold the patent for a relatively small number. The pharma company makes huge profits on it.

A Canadian company said they could deliver it for about $300/mon rather than $3,000/month the VA has to pay.


19 posted on 02/19/2024 7:18:23 PM PST by WASCWatch ( WASC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Tench_Coxe

“o be signed voluntarily by the owners of all such patents and copyrights.”

Voluntarily.


20 posted on 02/19/2024 7:20:30 PM PST by dljordan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Tench_Coxe

When one takes federal dollars, one has to play by federal rules.

The only question is what would be the fair royalty rate?

Perhaps $1 million for any FDA approved drug.

Perhaps $10 million for an FDA approved drug that doctors generally know of.

Perhaps $100 million for a drug of major importance.

Perhaps all doubled for being a breakthrough.

Perhaps also 100% of (allowed[normally 100%]) of domestic approval costs to the initial FDA approval recipient.


21 posted on 02/19/2024 7:24:37 PM PST by Brian Griffin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Tench_Coxe

The vacuum tube patent was bought for $100,000 by AT&T as I recollect.

That’s about $12 million in 2024 money.


22 posted on 02/19/2024 7:34:03 PM PST by Brian Griffin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Tench_Coxe

The official menaced a sneer…

“But who will I report to?’ asked the scientist, as the doctors looked on.

‘Why, the ‘Unification Board’,” the official laughed, smiling at the bureaucracy’s ability to seize the precise opposite of reality in any situation.


31 posted on 02/19/2024 10:27:23 PM PST by IncPen ("Inside of every progressive is a Totalitarian screaming to get out" ~ David Horowitz)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Tench_Coxe

I’m not sure why this would be controversial. If the U.S. government funds a research project that results in the development of a patent-protected concept, then the research partner(s) have no basis to insist on retaining ownership of the patent.


32 posted on 02/20/2024 1:01:09 AM PST by Alberta's Child (If something in government doesn’t make sense, you can be sure it makes dollars.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson