1837
Insulin (mander.xyz)
submitted 9 months ago by to c/science_memes@mander.xyz
334 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] -1 points 9 months ago (1 child)

Of course, but an university owning a patent gives them the responsibility to defend it, and also incentivizes them to do so.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [+] 1 point 9 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 child)
    [removed by mod]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    Tbh, I am surprised that you seem to know the exact legal situation in regards to patent law in Canada of 1923, and that you have such a strong opinion on that matter.

    I would recommend you to read the corresponding Wikipedia secton where all the thinking that went into that decision is laid out quite well.

    I would venture to say that legal experts of the time at the time understood the patent law of the time a little better than some random users on Lemmy.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [+] 0 points 9 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 child)
    [removed by mod]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -2 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 child)

    I did not run out of arguments, I posted a contemporary source that said everything I talked about all along.

    While you keep repeating the same talking points that might maybe hold true today but certainly aren't supported by anything contemporary. Repeating your points the same way all the time isn't "having new arguments". It's "running out of arguments but not admitting to it". And since you have been doing that in a loop for quite some time, there's no point bringing new arguments apart from "a whole bunch of lawyers from the same time came to the same conclusion multiple times in a row".

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [+] 2 points 9 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 child)
    [removed by mod]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -2 points 9 months ago* (1 child)

    You haven't provided any sources at all, you just ignored anything I said. So go, your turn. Post a source that says that transferring the patent to the university in 1923 was the wrong decision.

    If you know better than the lawyers they consulted back then, prove it. Back it up with something more than just made-up hot air.

    Obviously, the patent holders together with their legal council decided back then that it was the better choice because that's what they did. Or are you argueing that it never happend because it's on Wikipedia?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •