What if .... ethical theoretical disscussion

[Cloxxki]

MrMag got it so right!

The media, once the cat is out of the bag, will have no choice but to love you. The idea of being under danger of MIB, the drama, the emotion, the horism, you'll need to clone yourself to match all the appearance requests. Before you know it, the media will be coving the media circus surrounding you, as the public wants ll you have to offer them. You better not have personal indescretions you have not told your significant other and lawyer, though... :-)

MSM suck, but they can be used in your advantage, for safety, and income.

[Teutates]

ohhh  media attention, the spot light....        Personally,  I would hate that...

and if your a guy who doesn't want to appear on talk shows?  Who has no special knowledge, just had a moment of brilliance?  Is there a GNU public license to build so the general public can build their own if they choose... but corporations that choose to manufacture have to pay royalties?  Maybe the inventor can make replicas for classrooms and sell them... oh but wait someone in some 3rd world can make them for 1/10 the cost and undersell you in less than a month.

Anyone who believes that free energy/overunity will not be commercialized and exploited in some way is not thinking realistically,  yes those with special skills will be able to build their own... but what about the rest of us?  What if I were to stumble upon the perfect coil configuration for a pulse generator...  I cant build a unit that would be practical to use... that would last more than month or two.  I wouldn't be able to improve it..  I would not be able to provide useful consultation...  All I would be able to say is I was looking at a tree limb and the swirls in the bark struck a vibe and I reproduced it....  (example not real).

[exxcomm0n]

You are correct....  it would take care of the men in black suit problem... 

That's always been my assumption, it would take a real device presentation whose release was open sourced to put it to the test.

Your other point...  not true,  the inventor might get recognition, but just like any  other new technology the inventor without protection gets screwed...  why do you think patents exist to begin with?  The origin of the patent system was to protect the idea so the inventor who may not have financial resources could obtain the financial backing to begin producing his idea.... In other words to keep the big corporations from taking someones idea, producing it... then pocketing the money without paying the inventor.

Unless you have REALLY deep pockets, you will have to encounter "big" money in some way to build manufacturing for the device. If you don't sell it to a corporation, you'll probably have to go to a bank to secure funds for building and so corps talk to banks and you get denied loans you would need.
If you patent it and sell it to a big corp the other way they can bury the idea is to never produce the device, but to legally bar you or anyone else from making it.
Patents did have their day of protecting the inventors intellectual property but that protection now seems to be protection for big money.

If you have a device that you would like to present to the world, please do so in any way you deem fit, but please remember that most good ideas get squashed in one way or another when the quest for money is the primary goal.

<Edit>
The GNU public license is free. That freedom extends to selling the idea/device as long as the "source code" (or design) is in some way available to the general public upon request, but I don't believe there is a stipulation of how it is to be available to the general public.
Having to go to corp. headquarters after a lengthy series of requests and forms to finally be permitted to view and copy the device plans (and this assumes that there won't be a lengthy legal battle to force the corp. to honor the terms of the license) is yet another way to keep the device proprietary.

If you're looking for the license design you cite above, I suggest you look into GNU2, BSD, etc. licensing as I know that they do offer the inventor some legal recourse for control, but in that vein you might want to look into the legal gymnastics Microsoft used when writing the DOS computer operating system for IBM that sold IBM the OS to use, but still let microsoft develop it independently and founded the latest super-corp. dynasty.

But also remember that Microsoft is famous for killing other brilliant ideas by either buying them, or undercutting the competition by putting out a competing project "for free" (Netscaping the competition is what it's known as).

[MrMag]

ohhh  media attention, the spot light....        Personally,  I would hate that...

and if your a guy who doesn't want to appear on talk shows?  Who has no special knowledge, just had a moment of brilliance?  Is there a GNU public license to build so the general public can build their own if they choose... but corporations that choose to manufacture have to pay royalties?  Maybe the inventor can make replicas for classrooms and sell them... oh but wait someone in some 3rd world can make them for 1/10 the cost and undersell you in less than a month.

Anyone who believes that free energy/overunity will not be commercialized and exploited in some way is not thinking realistically,  yes those with special skills will be able to build their own... but what about the rest of us?  What if I were to stumble upon the perfect coil configuration for a pulse generator...  I cant build a unit that would be practical to use... that would last more than month or two.  I wouldn't be able to improve it..  I would not be able to provide useful consultation...  All I would be able to say is I was looking at a tree limb and the swirls in the bark struck a vibe and I reproduced it....  (example not real).

Hahaha, exactly! I can't even talk to a group of 30 people without wearing my pull-ups . I'm more of a practical person. I always hated theory. If I ever discovered something, the way I would describe the theory behind it is," just put these parts like this and it will work". I'm sure I'd come off as a real idiot. I think it would be best for me to play the dumb/mute roll and hire some salesman/PR guy to do the talking for me.

I agree that there would be swarms of companies around to suck up your technology. They would probably pay you just to endorse their unit. We will need some companies to build them anyways since what you said about "not everyone can build one" is true. The more companies that start-up the cheaper the unit will be.

It would be nice to make enough money to retire comfortably though. I'm not talking millions upon millions. Just enough so that your worries will be minimized. I think getting a device out there for everyone to use if they can make it or have to buy it would be good enough for me. I think that I would feel that my purpose in life is complete.

[Trino Cularoid]

I guess one of the goals would be a smooth transition... One scenario I've heard of would be to first keep it within (open) "communities" â€" people who can deal with the possibility that such things might actually work, and where one doesn't have to fight for acceptance. They would grow as more people hear of them, and others who are not ready yet wouldn't feel threatened if no-one has the urge to involve the media. Within these communities, it could work on some kind of an exchange base instead of using money directly so not to directly threaten the ones who currently depend on making money using conventional fuels. Communication between communities would be a given considering that we have the Internet and fora like this one. After enough people join, a point would be reached where these things would suddenly become commonly accepted...