you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 51 points 2 years ago (5 children)

Let's be more clear: IF THEY DONT PATENT IT SOMEONE ELSE WILL.

UCR is fairly innocuous compared to some alternatives.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 41 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    That's in fact why some universities patent their research stuff in the first place, to ensure nobody else can. They'll then make it a policy to take 0€ in licensing fees, but this precludes anybody else from starting to lock the tech behind money.

    Source: My uni back in the days had a few dozen patents for exactly this reason, too.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    IANAL but patents rely on originality, meaning a preprint of the original paper is basically enough to make the technology impossible to patent. Well probably more than just the paper I guess.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago

    I learned it too that it has to be "new". Most likely it is a hell of a lot easier to directly patent it and have a strong legal foundation than just wait around and scramble for proof if it needs to be. Probably also helps being picked up by the industry.

  • source
  • parent