Article View: sci.physics
Article #8688Re: Under-Appreciated Gems of Scientific Epistemology
From: kevincar
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2004 20:34
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2004 20:34
48 lines
2899 bytes
2899 bytes
Uncle Al <UncleAl0@hate.spam.net> wrote in message news:<40FDC0EF.CD548CAC@hate.spam.net>... > Jeff Lanfield wrote: > > > > I am writing a paper on how new ideas gain acceptance in science. > > Reproducible empirical demonstration by despised and undeserving > discoverers. > > Kary Mullis won a 1993 Nobel Prize subsequent to a boring > late-night drive down Highway 128 to Anderson Valley (Mendocino > County, CA) in April 1983. Millis got a $10K bonus for his > invention. Cetus sold his PCR patent to Hoffman-LaRoche for > $300,000,000. > > I'd say a 0.0033% bonus was a bit slim, wouldn't you? "despised > and undeserving" > [---] Heh- I would have dreamed of such a bonus. When I worked at a company that I won't name, but it rhymes with "sitting blank," we had to sign away all of our patentable work for $1 - Well, I wrangled a patent or two (One in the U.S. and one in India)... And I never even got the frickin dollar. AFAIK, when you're doing your job and getting paid for it, any patentable works are solely the property of the employer because legally you are merely the agent of the employer, unless there are prior legally provable agreements that were made, in which case the inventor is not and agent, but enters "contractee" status - guess how often THAT happens in corporate America :-/. So, you'll probably find you'll have a pretty big list of "despised discoverers"... at least monetarily - I'm guessing somewhere around a half a million or so, maybe most of them actually living. The only thing I personally have found that patent inventorship bestowed upon me as an agent of an employer is that of tenure - Hell, I know that does count for something, but you won't get rich off it, obviously. K.C
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<60bf9d3f.0407281234.4aff0c1e@posting.google.com>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!g2news1.google.com!postnews2.google.com!not-for-mailReferences:
<235c483f.0407201549.681ffa4@posting.google.com> <40FDC0EF.CD548CAC@hate.spam.net>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Thread: 10b271,b67b806e5863d1f2 X-Google-Thread: 105b48,b67b806e5863d1f2 X-Google-Thread: f4886,b67b806e5863d1f2 X-Google-Thread: fd5f7,b67b806e5863d1f2 X-Google-Thread: 1045ed,b67b806e5863d1f2 X-Google-Attributes: gid10b271,gid105b48,gidf4886,gidfd5f7,gid1045ed,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!g2news1.google.com!postnews2.google.com!not-for-mail From: kevindotcar@yahoo.com (kevincar) Newsgroups: sci.physics,sci.med,sci.chem,sci.econ,bionet.neuroscience Subject: Re: Under-Appreciated Gems of Scientific Epistemology Date: 28 Jul 2004 13:34:02 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com Lines: 48 Message-ID: <60bf9d3f.0407281234.4aff0c1e@posting.google.com> References: <235c483f.0407201549.681ffa4@posting.google.com> <40FDC0EF.CD548CAC@hate.spam.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.31.202.4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1091046843 13429 127.0.0.1 (28 Jul 2004 20:34:03 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2004 20:34:03 +0000 (UTC)