Vaccine breakthrough means no more chasing strains - eviltoast
  • NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    7 months ago

    Generally these “patented” products from universities are funded via tax payer money. I am not cool with them profiting off something that is intended to save lives and was also funded by the very people who’s lives will be affected.

    Putting things behind a patent wall only hinders progress.

    • 4am@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      A patent also ensures no one else can patent it. If they make it affordable and available they are protected from someone else patenting it and then “profitmaxxing” because they have legal recourse to prevent that.

      Of course now it is up to them to do that…

    • dohpaz42@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      7 months ago

      Public universities receive funding from a multitude of sources. Research is typically funded by grants, which may come from state or federal sources, but they can also come from alumni, fundraising, or charitable trusts.

      Regardless, patents are a necessary part of invention. As others have pointed out, without a patent, what’s to stop some other entity from coming along and (for example) using your hard work to make themselves rich? I’d wager if it were your invention/discovery, you’d want protections too.

      There are some entities out there that would easily abuse patents. But I find it hard to believe a public university would be one of them.