On Fri, 2004-10-29 at 14:02, Jeff Garland wrote:

> No, that's not how I understand it.  ASU would have to develop the technology
> (perhaps jointly) and then it would get licensed -- they aren't going to be a
> 'technology speculator' -- buying and trading work they didn't do.  So the
> goal is really to encourage and develop exchanges between academic research
> and private industry.  And that's the other reason I voted in favor because I
> believe we need to encourage these interactions between universities and
> business.  This has a long history of success and I think it encourages some
> of the academic world to focus on nearer-term research -- also a good thing. 
> And, BTW, I would expect most of these things will fail.  Of course, failure
> is critical to advancing things because it shines light into dead ends...
> 
> Of course, as I said above, my true view is we need radical reform of the
> whole 'IP' system. Unfortunately, I just don't see that happening until some
> crises makes ordinary people wake up and care about this stuff.  So in the
> meantime we have to make things run as smooth as we can...
----
I very much agree with you.

Technology speculation is part and parcel of scientific endeavor.
Obviously, the technologies that get commercial interest and thus
licensed are those that show promise.

This is a good idea whose time has come to Arizona. Just guessing on
this but this doesn't seem to be an idea springing from the state
legislature since progressive and innovative isn't something that they
are routinely accused of. 

Craig

---------------------------------------------------
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change  you mail settings:
http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss