Of Course Tesla Wasn't Just Being Altruistic In Opening Up Its Patents: That's The Whole Point!
from the the-velocity-of-innovation dept
We, like many in the media, already wrote up the story about Elon Musk's announcement that Tesla was opening up all of Tesla's patents, promising not to bring any lawsuits against anyone who uses them in good faith. The "good faith" caveat has resulted in some head scratching and reasonable questions -- and we hope that Musk clarifies this position with a clearer explanation. Some have pointed out that with such vague language, it may really be more of an invitation to negotiate a licensing deal, rather than truly opening up the patents (though, I'd imagine anyone looking to challenge that has lawyers boning up on promissory estoppel). However, I wanted to address one of the "criticisms" that seemed to come out repeatedly about this move: that it wasn't a big deal because it's "not altruistic." That line was used over and over and over again in the press, almost always suggesting that people shouldn't be celebrating this move.- LA Times: "Even if other competitors copy Tesla’s design, Tesla still gets to sell them batteries, and that’s pretty awesome. Tesla’s decision isn’t entirely altruistic."
- Seeking Alpha: "The general thinking is that somehow this move is altruistic for the benefit of the EV industry or that this has something to do with parallels like Mac OS X, Wikipedia, and crowdfunding. We disagree. This is simply a strategic move to rapidly expand and monetize the EV market. This move is hard-core strategy and really has nothing to do with altruism."
- NASDAQ: Elon Musk and Tesla: Altruistic or Ulterior Motive?
- Forbes: "Of course, Musk may have an ulterior motive in addition to his altruistic one."
- South China Morning Post: "Tesla’s apparent altruism with its patents is just smart business"
- ValueWalk: "Tesla Motors Inc's open source approach is far from altruistic."
- Harvard Business Review: "In sum, Elon Musk’s opening up of Tesla’s patent portfolio might be motivated as much by strategic necessity rather than by altruism."
- Market News Call: "Musk may not be successful running two industrial firms like online social media or cloud-focused firms, but he’s also not making decisions entirely out of altruism; he’s just using a non-traditional approach to creating value for his shareholders."
- Engineering.com: "I think he [Nikola Tesla] would approve of Tesla Motors’ decision to open its technology to the world, even if the motivation was more business than altruism."
And the worst may be in that first link up there, in which analyst giant Gartner completely destroys what little credibility it may have had when one of its analysts, Thilo Koslowski, pans the decision: "If you open up all your books to everyone, it means you all are fighting a war with the same weapons." Talk about someone admitting their own ignorance of how business and innovation actually works. Opening up your patents hardly means fighting a war with all the same weapons. Everyone still gets to innovate, and many of those innovations are not in the patents themselves.
A further Musk quote in a Business Week piece further outlines what's happening here:
"You want to be innovating so fast that you invalidate your prior patents, in terms of what really matters. It’s the velocity of innovation that matters."This is a point that we've been trying to make for years: innovation is an ongoing process, and what matters most is not the single burst of inspiration, but the pace of that process -- which Musk more eloquently calls "the velocity of innovation." Patents on pieces of that ongoing process act as friction or toll booths in that process, slowing it down. Truly innovative companies know that they're going to keep innovating, and others copying what they're doing is the least of their worries.
Of course this move is about innovation and business and will be good for Tesla. But it's depressing that so many people automatically think that needs to be explained. We live in a dangerous world for innovation when a concept as simple as this seems so foreign to so many people. Even the fact that the idea that "doing good" and "building a good business" seem to be contradictory terms is troubling. Whether or not Musk is personally "altruistic" is beyond the point. Increasing the velocity of innovation for electric vehicles can be both good for Tesla and for the world, and that shouldn't be such a crazy idea.
Oh, and in case you haven't seen it yet, go check out what Tesla did to the wall where they used to hang their patents:
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: altruism, business, electric cars, elon musk, innovation, patents, protectionism, sharing
Companies: tesla
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
True Business Model
Along with reasonable security and first to market, this is a beautiful concept.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Um... Duh?
My Dad had been looking into getting a Tesla, but it's almost impossible to use the thing where I live. There are no charging stations, the car would only be able to be charged at home. But if more electric car manufacturers were around, more charging stations would pop up, making it easier to own a Tesla.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Um... Duh?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Wait a second...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Infringement
(Because it couldn't be fair use to use one screencap from a game. Unless you get in some lawyers to argue it is, in which case it's fine, but no lawyers, no fair use.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Confusion
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
In A.D. 2014, lawsuit was beginning
ALL OUR PATENT ARE BELONG TO YOU
YOU ARE ON THE WAY TO INNOVATION
YOU HAVE EXCELLENT CHANCE TO SURVIVE MAKE YOUR TIME
HA HA HA HA...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Gartner's credibility?!?!?
>>analyst giant Gartner completely destroys what little
>>credibility it may have had
Gartner is a lot like Flo Müller; anyone that thinks either has any credibility left simply does not have the mental horsepower for a tech discussion... or even most other discussions, for that matter.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Grammar
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Grammar
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It seems pretty clear to me. As an engineer, if I did and said something like that, here's what I would mean by it:
"Go ahead and use this, but play nice. I'm placing a lot of trust in you guys, and if you abuse that trust by doing something stupid, such as using our patents but then turning around and trying to frivolously sue us for patent infringement, keep in mind that I can and will revoke permission. So don't."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Why altruistic?
It amazes me how many "analysts" judged this move on whether or not it was "altruistic". Why? Is that what Musk said it was supposed to be? Is there some unwritten law that says business decisions must be, or even should be, altruistic? I really don't get it. I don't understand why seemingly intelligent people are so quick to show their ignorance by fighting an argument that doesn't exist. The point of whether or not this is "altruistic" is entirely arbitrary.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Why altruistic?
In that sense, he's the sort of businessman that we wish all businessmen were.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Why altruistic?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Why altruistic?
In other words, it could be made faster than passenger jets, and do so directly to and from population centers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Same provable fact goes for clothes etc...
Look at Formula 1 and their relentless development cycle of teams eventually copying other teams innovations. The team who has a head start on the tech, has the advantage. Using that advantage is the aim, not abusing the whole system and disallowing anyone to copy your innovation and yourself from copying other innovation.
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2032167-mercedes-advantage-in-2014-a-simple-explanation-of-revolu tionary-f1-engine
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Funny
Musk wants the big car companies to effectively fund his business model by paying to create the infrastructure to support his cars, which his company appears unable to do on a scale that makes it possible for the company to expand past a certain point.
He is using the patents and the patent system to his advantage, as any other business would do. He is perhaps the perfect proof that the patent system works.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Funny
If this is what the patent system working looks like, then I agree with you 100%! Unfortunately, we still have Intellectual Ventures, Macrosolve, Personal Audio, Parallel Iron etc who still don't know how to use the patent system properly. I hope they're watching!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Funny (not)
If it worked like this,
1. Tesla wouldn't need to open up their patents. The system would do it instead of them (and to many other patent holders)
2. Elon Musk's choice wouldn't have been greeted with confusion and so much positive surprise. It should be the norm. Which is apparently not.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Funny (not)
2. It's not the norm to spend a ton of money developing something and then just give it away. That isn't confusion and surprise you are hearing, it's the sounds of people pointing at the clear motivation behind his grandiose move. It's not about the patent system, it's about trying to avoid his company becoming an afterthought in the electric car world as the big companies move to their own standards and ignore him.
Basically, he is offering to play ball while he still has a hope of being relevant.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Funny (not)
My point was this:
Elon Musk clearly demonstrated how much government monopoly is needed to recuperate R&D costs. 5 years at most. Longer monopoly only hinders innovation.
The current patent system support patents for 20+ years (ridiculous, shitty, overbroad patents at that), which in turn hinders innovation, give big corporations another tool to stiffle competition and trolls a chance to fleece startup companies (hindering innovation further)
So I ask you again: how is the patent system works when the people who want to innovate have to work around it while it is just another tool in the hands of the big players who want to hinder others?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
cool story
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: cool story
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: cool story
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: cool story
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: cool story
You realize that using Tor, by RIAA rules which you follow, makes you a pirate?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Science in the Fast Lane
[ link to this | view in chronology ]