Open Source Vs. Patenting

[ResinRat2]

I think this is why I really like this forum. It gives individual researchers the opportunity to fully disclose their work to thousands of curious onlookers. Once the information is posted, people can immediately begin replication.

It does require generosity of the inventor though, since it does not work to the inventor's financial advantage; but if something does work, it allows the information to spread quickly.

[hydrocontrol]

A patent only works if it is implented over the entire world and even then the results are in question. A patent 'if filed fully transparent' and is simple enough to replicate does not stop any one individual from replicating for their own purpose. Just as long as that individual does not set up a company for selling the item they can make them and give (not sell, at least not get caught selling) them to their friends.. What does the patent owner get.. Nada. A lot of items that are patented do not seem to have a problem being replicated in back rooms of other countries (like China) without any roylaties to the patent owner. Most good patents are owned or sold to large corporations that have the resources to go after others that are using the patent or they just bury it so others can not use it. A lot of time patents can be circumvented just by changing one or two items from the original. What does the original patent owner get. Nothing. Open source on the other hand gets the information out that can be used for practical purposes in a timely fashion. A lot depends on the type of person with the information. Do they want to make money ? Do they want to help 'save the world' ? Do they want frame ? It seems that most people that patent or try to patent a device that may help 'save the world' end up being dead. Being dead does not make you money, does not help 'save the world', and the only fame you get is being added to the list of dead inventors. So if you have a great device that may help 'save the world' then maybe open sourcing it may be the better may to go. It may not make you rich but you may live longer...

[hartiberlin]

Yes, as an inventor in this free energy field you can make
much more money and much more faster by going open
source, than from applying for a patent.

A patent is only good as long as you can fight financially
the big companies, which try to copy your patents with no royallities
payments.
Better go open source and make money from your famousity !
Write a book, be invited to paid talkshows, setup your own site
with Google adsense advertisement and get paid for the traffic, etc... etc..

Also get hired by a big company, who develops your technology further, etc..

It will all pay out muchg faster, than spending thousands for a patent
and fighting to get copycats from replicating it without paying
royallities...
Today in this Internet age, where information is transferred in millisconds
around the globe and where in China and other countries every hardware is
hacked in 2 weeks and reproduced in masses, it will
pay more out, if you go open source as the inventor...

Also much less stress without all the patent hassles...


Regards, Stefan.

[ring_theory]

open source? only usefull for peer review and getting the technology to those that will use it. other than that it's a failure as a way of getting rich. no one will buy the product if you give the technology away. IMHO! 

[FreeEnergy]

open source? only usefull for peer review and getting the technology to those that will use it. other than that it's a failure as a way of getting rich. no one will buy the product if you give the technology away. IMHO! 

actually a lot of people buy open source tech and depend on it. how do you think the internet got here? http://catb.org/~esr/faqs/hacker-howto.html