Tesla patents. Go ahead and use them.

[foghorn67]

Translation - our technology is not profitable now because large auto manufacturers won't adopt it and the installed infrastructure does not support it. We will try to increase adoption by donating technology to the public. Once adoption is increased, we will kick ourselves and our company will go out of business because we will be subjugated by those who can make and use our technology more efficiently and at lower cost. We might feel good that we brought the world closer to the electric car. But we will be out of business nonetheless.

Oh . . . and our investors will be pissed at us and may sue the Board of directors for recklessly endangering the financial future of the company in favor of a idealistic goal, which has no business driving the bottom line of a company.

I sense a big "DOH" from Elon in the future. And a huge drop in Tesla stock.

I don't want to agree with you...but I am.

 

[Vdubchaos]

Although it's a nice gesture, no one cares.

Electric cars will fail just like they failed 100 years ago. Car makers are not biting FOR A REASON.

There is no easy solution to energy, and electric motor is CERTAINLY not it.

 

[Sho'Nuff]

Because if other companies use the patents and spend billions improving on them, then Tesla will get to use those new ones also. Since they are based on their tech and patents. Which is fine if anyone takes the bait. And everybody wins.

No offense but that is not how the U.S. IP system works. At all. There is no implied grant back clause. Tesla is giving the world a gift. Which would be fine if they were a non-profit. But they are not so . . . .

 

[Paul98]

Electric cars are coming, the energy density, charging time, of the batteries are all getting better consistently. Along with any major breakthroughs that may be had in the near future. Most of these breakthroughs in battery technology don't pan out but only one or two would need to and it's going to be major.

 

[norseamd]

No offense but that is not how the U.S. IP system works. At all. There is no implied grant back clause. Tesla is giving the world a gift. Which would be fine if they were a non-profit. But they are not so . . . .

tesla can do what they would like

of course crony capitalists probably are thinking about how to pass a law comparable to the old south laws outlawing freeing any slave from the area

 

[Sho'Nuff]

Yea, I didn't read the conditions on the release. They could very well have a viral license similar to GPL attached to their usage.

There are no conditions on the release as far as I can tell, except maybe for the indication that the 3rd party use must be "in good faith." Whatever that means. Why any for profit company would do this I have no idea. Unless of course Tesla feels that the only way for the electric car to become viable is to advance their competition. Which means that they are in a sad state of affairs (business wise) as it is.

You know what would advance the electric car a lot? Making an affordable one. An 80k+ roadster is not going to do it. No matter how pretty it might look.

 

[Sho'Nuff]

tesla can do what they would like

of course crony capitalists probably are thinking about how to pass a law comparable to the old south laws outlawing freeing any slave from the area

Did you just compare IP law to slavery? Holy shite. I've heard some crazy as stuff but nothing that far off the deep end.

I have no problem with a company being altruistic. But I know something about corporate law. And I know for a fact that Tesla shareholders who have some business sense are not going to appreciate the CEO eviscerating the value of Tesla's largest assets. I also know that giving away technology for free sounds good on paper. That is, until your competitors start beating you. Or you try to make money. Or both.

 

[norseamd]

Did you just compare IP law to slavery? Holy shite. I've heard some crazy as stuff but nothing that far off the deep end.

I have no problem with a company being altruistic. But I know something about corporate law. And I know for a fact that Tesla shareholders who have some business sense are not going to appreciate the CEO eviscerating the value of Tesla's largest assets. I also know that giving away technology for free sounds good on paper. That is, until your competitors start beating you. Or you try to make money. Or both.

did you even read the words of the quote

and how is neo-colonialism more ethical than colonialism

 

[dighn]

Electric cars will fail just like they failed 100 years ago. Car makers are not biting FOR A REASON.

There is no easy solution to energy, and electric motor is CERTAINLY not it.

the sort of technology we have now cannot even be compared to what was available 100 years ago. not sure what your point is there. also car makers are not biting because they make money just fine without disruptive technologies - that's why we have tesla trying to disrupt the market.

electric motor certainly isn't the solution to energy problems, but it's a good step forward for automotive technology - it's simple, flexible and plenty powerful.

 

[Sho'Nuff]

?

Here's the problem - his business and his sales are being held back in part by the lack of infrastructure needed to support electric vehicles.

There are people who would most definitely consider buying electric vehicles but don't have the ability to recharge the batteries in any reasonable fashion. His business's growth depends on other people pouring money into the electric car infrastructure.

But Elon is not giving away Tesla's patents that are drawn only to that infrastructure. He is giving away ALL Tesla patents. Present and future. Which I presume includes patents drawn to technology used in their core business, i.e., electric cars. If they wanted to promote infrastructure they could have created a patent pool drawn to infrastructure related technology that grants a royalty free license and includes grant back clauses.

Any way you slice it this strikes me as Elon giving away the goose that lays (or will lay) the golden egg.

 

[Sho'Nuff]

what happens when something conflicts with some self supporting dogmatic culture of thinking?

In this case, a business will likely fail.

 

[EvilYoda]

You know what would advance the electric car a lot? Making an affordable one. An 80k+ roadster is not going to do it. No matter how pretty it might look.

And that's what they intend to do with their Model E (or whatever they end up naming it). He's more than aware that the Tesla Roadster and Model S are only toys for the well-off.

 

[Sho'Nuff]

tesla already has brand name recognition that is equal to any intellectual property

What exactly do you think a brand name is? I'll give you a hint. It starts with T and ends with rademark.

No.

That can't be.

Trademarks are a kind of IP?

IP is bad. Baaaaaaaaaaaaad.

Ergo. Tesla must give away its name. Cause brand names er. . . . IP . . . is bad.

Sheesh

 

[norseamd]

In this case, a business will likely fail.

that question was philosophical and directed torwards you

 

[Sho'Nuff]

that question was philosophical and directed torwards you

Fair enough. I will thrive. Regardless of whether the patent system remains in place or otherwise. I am not a one trick pony.

 

[bradley]

In the spirit of Nikola Tesla himself, the move actually brings a little tear to my eye.

And anyone not knowing the story of Tesla himself needs to research it. In my mind, he's second only to Jesus as the most fascinating human to have ever lived.

 

[Sho'Nuff]

tesla can do what they would like

of course crony capitalists probably are thinking about how to pass a law comparable to the old south laws outlawing freeing any slave from the area

Tesla is a public company. It is run by a board of directors, which is obligated to use reasonable business judgment to make money for the company's shareholders. It is (in my opinion) highly questionable whether Elon's pronouncement that Tesla technology is now open source will be considered by Tesla's shareholders to be in their interest. To the point that I would be VERY surprised if a shareholder derivative suit is not filed against Tesla's board in the near future.

 

[norseamd]

if some other company comes along and used the name tesla customers are not just going to assume that they are the exact same company

the name is nothing more than some name

the company tesla has recognition and consumers may go to them to purchase cars because they are some well known resource

as long as they make quality goods then they will continue to gain sales off their reputation

some companies gain favorable reputation and then start producing shit goods and that is when they lose sales form their loyal customers

 

[norseamd]

Tesla is a public company. It is run by a board of directors, which are obligated to use reasonable business judgment to make money for the company's shareholders. It is (in my opinion) highly questionable whether Elon's pronouncement that Tesla technology is now open source will be considered by Tesla's shareholders to be in their interest. To the point that I would be VERY surprised if a shareholder derivative suit is not filed against Tesla's board in the near future.

your point has worth

what i meant is that i would not be surprised if some companies tried to prevent other companies from releasing ideas into the public domain even if they invented the ideas on their own

 

[Sho'Nuff]

guys like elon musk and richard branson are successful off their own intelligence and drive to do what it takes and western crony culture hates them for not going along with the wasteful and dystopic quagmire

You might want to check your facts re: branson. He sues people for IP infringement too.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/anderso...i-am-not-a-virgin-for-copyright-infringement/

 

[norseamd]

You might want to check your facts re: branson. He sues people for IP infringement too.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/anderso...i-am-not-a-virgin-for-copyright-infringement/

yah i included richard branson because he is very successful at entrepreneurship and often does stuff that most large established companies would not

not guessing any qualities of his character

 

[bradley]

your point has worth

what i meant is that i would not be surprised if some companies tried to prevent other companies from releasing ideas into the public domain even if they invented the ideas on their own

Well yeah?? It's not even that poignant and a rather obvious point. The world is about money; it crushes anyone and anything in its path; this move is totally antithetical to money; therefore this unprecedented move will ensure many angry shareholders and that contracts contain additional pages of legalese.

In the end this move speed the progress of electric cars, and is great for society. Brushless DC motors are easily superior to even the best tried-and-true gas engine.

 

[Maverickbcp]

The guy got where he is for a reason. Could he have fallen off his rocker? Possibly. Should that not be the case though I wouldn't be surprised if this decision wasn't a long thought out strategic move for their company that we're just not seeing the entire picture of yet. I'm leaning towards the "They want to be the major battery manufacturer" and/or "They need more adaptation" so sadly they have to take others by the hand. Better/cheaper batteries will get built as well as more charging stations as another poster mentioned. Gotta give some to get some.

 

[bradley]

I agree totally with being the major battery manufacturer angle, btw.... especially with A123 systems having gone bankrupt and slowly crawling back.

 

[norseamd]

i think he wants to change the world

some want to conquer, some want to build

businessmen seem to fail to understand anything outside of their world