[compost_tea] Re:pretty close to compost tea!

From: Titel Ryzhomer <thegoodjob_at_hotmail.com>
Date: Thu, 07 Oct 2004 20:32:17 -0000

Ted,

If I collect a certain combination of herbs and make some extracts
and perhaps form a new molecular bond by cooking one of the
ingredients in vinegar (of course I don't know about the molecular
bond) and then combine the ingredients together and find that it
cures the flu when ingested and start bottling it and trading it
around the neighborhood for sustanance and favors and a big funded
research outfit stumbles on the same thing through a slightly
different process and announces the molecular bond with fanfare and
patents it, does that mean I can no longer make up my recipe and
sell it?

If I enter a contract to do research for a company or government to
research and create a specific substance for them using their money
and getting paid am I ethically or morally justified in patenting
the end result substance in my own name and not my employer's?

These are the points I see.
Are you Republican?
Titel

--- In compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com, "Ted Peterson"
<ted.peterson_at_t...> wrote:
>   I have a problem when our tax dollars are given to a scientist
to do a research project that the scientist wrote a proposal for
that states the research they will do, and the scientist gets that
funding, does the work and discovers a potential commercial product,
and then turns around a patents the process or the product, claiming
they, or the institution they hold a position at, now deserves the
commercial rights to that product.
>
>   That is not ethical.  At the very least, the tax payer should be
re-imbursed.
>
>   Do not mis-read what I wrote.  But, enough.  No more on this
topic from me.
>
> Sorry, you don't get the last word on this. Especially when that
last word is misleading.  And please stop suggesting people misread
you when they disagree with you.  Your implications are clear enough.
>
> I think that the behavior you are describing is highly ethical. 
What I find unethical is an artificial attempt to control creativity
and alternative forms of investigation.  I don't think the tax
payers should be reimbursed for that any more than they should be
reimbursed for failed weapons systems or avenues of investigation
that turn up nothing and there are loads of them. As long as we have
a system of centralization, we will have this problem.  You want the
problem to end, lobby your gummint to stop funding anything.
>
> Ted Peterson
> EW/SOE




Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
click here


Yahoo! Groups Links

Received on Thu Oct 07 2004 - 23:09:31 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Feb 07 2012 - 14:15:30 EST