Tesla patents go open source

[eran0004]

In a blog post titled "All Our Patent Are Belong To You" at teslamotors.com, Elon Musk share the news that Tesla's patents are now released into the realm of open source, free to use in good faith for each and anyone. He believes that protecting Tesla patents is actually contradicting to their goal of advancing the electric vehicle technology and that all car companies producing electric cars, as well as the world, would benefit from a "common, rapidly evolving platform".

He also shares his opinion that patents aren't really good at anything, except at making people in the legal profession wealthy. They lay obstacles in front of other companies, they offer poor protection if a competitor is determined enough, and he describes obtaining a patent as "buying a lottery ticket to a lawsuit".

What do you think? Is it a good move? Will other car companies join in and share their electric car technology? Is this a milestone in the evolution of motoring?

 

[Omnis]

I think this is a great thing. Why should it affect Tesla, anyway? Nobody has tools sophisticated enough to reproduce Tesla components. Certainly not as cheaply as Tesla could. And if they do wind up beating Tesla at their own game, Elon can just buy them out.

You don't have to be the smartest or the best. You just have to be smart enough to hire them.

 

[Kent]

Interesting move.
Tesla either believes (and rightly so) that patents contradict the idea of innovation and creation for the sake of a better world... OR... It's a chess move to watch someone else improve the technology then use it to their advantage.

Either way Tesla wins the game because of their existing presence and hardware.

Well played Tesla, well played.

 

[Imari]

Meh, marketing move.

I mean, bravo, it's a really nice sentiment behind what they're doing. But if they think that their patents were what was stopping other companies from mass producing electric vehicles, I think they're in for a bit of a surprise. The world will not suddenly be flooded with electric cars just because Tesla have deigned to share the results of their brilliance with the rest of us mere mortals.

 

[jimipitbull]

Not sure how or why people would put a negative spin on this ^?

Well done Tesla, if only more companies would do the same.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Interesting move.
Tesla either believes (and rightly so) that patents contradict the idea of innovation and creation for the sake of a better world... OR... It's a chess move to watch someone else improve the technology then use it to their advantage.

Either way Tesla wins the game because of their existing presence and hardware.

Well played Tesla, well played.

Why not both?

I have new found respect for him, at first I thought he was a bit annoying, but he's quite clever from the way he sells his cars and all the way up to this.

 

[Omnis]

Meh, marketing move.

I mean, bravo, it's a really nice sentiment behind what they're doing. But if they think that their patents were what was stopping other companies from mass producing electric vehicles, I think they're in for a bit of a surprise. The world will not suddenly be flooded with electric cars just because Tesla have deigned to share the results of their brilliance with the rest of us mere mortals.

The point is you can have business without IP. IP is a fabrication to make lawyers rich and people miserable.

 

[Imari]

The point is you can have business without IP. IP is a fabrication to make lawyers rich and people miserable.

Yes.

And so my point was that while people will laud Tesla and Musk for this (as seen above), they're really not doing anything special, or even really giving away anything of value. They don't need those patents, and they're worthless to them unless they're willing to defend them anyway. And even if they are willing to defend them, it's a rare patent these days that is broad enough to cover all sensible methods of solving a problem, it just ensures that no one solves it in the exact way the patent holder did.

It's a great marketing move, but I don't see it doing a damn thing for the electric car industry. The electric car industry is not stagnant because Tesla/Musk have a monopoly on all the good ideas, it's stagnant because the whole electric system is still not good enough for Joe Public to replace his hydrocarbon fuelled beastie.

 

[Robin]

Apparently the press have been bending the truth regarding this story.

Tesla is not releasing its hold or ownership on the patents, its merely turning a blind eye to anyone who wants to use idea's and technology from them. Tesla would be well within it's rights to suddenly have a change of heart and sue the lot of them!

Frankly it's only after you become a Billionaire that you can be this cocky, it's kind of insulting to everyone who has worked hard on that IP to just reveal it all. Would the 18 year old Musk do the same thing?, not a chance!

 

[Imari]

Apparently the press have been bending the truth regarding this story.

Tesla is not releasing its hold or ownership on the patents, its merely turning a blind eye to anyone who wants to use idea's and technology from them. Tesla would be well within it's rights to suddenly have a change of heart and sue the lot of them!

I seriously doubt it. You cannot publically declare that anyone may use your IP, and then take people to court for acting on that statement.

Any sensible judge would throw Tesla out on the street if they tried that.

Frankly it's only after you become a Billionaire that you can be this cocky, it's kind of insulting to everyone who has worked hard on that IP to just reveal it all. Would the 18 year old Musk do the same thing?, not a chance!

Doubtful.

The people who worked hard on it are off working on the next extension of the research. The level of interest in the applications of the last round of research is likely limited. That's for the businessmen and lawyers to worry about, not researchers.

Researchers also tend to be keenly aware that all the knowledge that has brought them up to the current state of the art is from someone else sharing their knowledge. If they'd had to work up from first principles of wet cells and frog's legs, they'd have a couple of hundred years of work before they got anywhere near an electric car.

While there's some passion to hang on to the new knowledge you've gained because it has value, I think you'll find that most researchers have a keen understanding of the value of sharing knowledge as well. It could be said that the odd thing here is that Musk, essentially a businessman, is taking the research-type position of sharing knowledge. But I seriously doubt that there's much in those patents that the research groups at the other majors don't know already.

It's a marketing gimmick. What I don't get is why do it now.

 

[Robin]

There's seems to be a point at which ruthless businessman suddenly want to become saints. Usually after they have more money than they know what to do with! I agree it’s a marketing gimmick and it's almost like some vanity trip for Musk. He wants his name in the history books as the guy who gifted the world technology which will one day become integral to life.

As for why now, I think it might be because the Model S has just launched in Europe and he wants to create some buzz.

Most sensible businesses would guard patents with their life, just look at the billion dollar fights in the tech world over seemly tiny pieces of IP. This is a car company, not a university. Traditionally academic research has been very open and company research has been very closed (building upon the open research). If you open source everything how would any company make money?

 

[Exorcet]

it's kind of insulting to everyone who has worked hard on that IP to just reveal it all.

Maybe, maybe not. They wouldn't own the patent anyway as it would go to the company. Also there is a fear of proprietary information among engineers sometimes. I've heard that signing an NDA can equate to signing your life away to one company. If you lose your job and try to be employed elsewhere people might be afraid of hiring you and learning someone else's secret because it would be a violation of the NDA and lead to legal trouble.

There's seems to be a point at which ruthless businessman suddenly want to become saints. Usually after they have more money than they know what to do with!

Maybe he's just a ruthless businessman and saint at the same time. Or maybe it's just greed being channeled into something positive (though I really loathe the idea that business people are greedy or less good than average people).

 

[Robin]

Maybe, maybe not. They wouldn't own the patent anyway as it would go to the company. Also there is a fear of proprietary information among engineers sometimes. I've heard that signing an NDA can equate to signing your life away to one company. If you lose your job and try to be employed elsewhere people might be afraid of hiring you and learning someone else's secret because it would be a violation of the NDA and lead to legal trouble.

All the more reason to care because IP is owned by the company, you have a vested interest in how they operate. If they gave away IP to someone else who might eventually bankrupt your employer (because they did it better) you would be pretty annoyed. NDA's are pretty common place in any R&D based roles, especially these days with strong competition.

 

[Imari]

If you open source everything how would any company make money?

By being better at what you do than anyone else.

There's a pretty big difference between knowing what needs to be done to make an amazing electric car, and actually doing it. This applies to many industries, where the basic designs are publically available, but there's still a dominant market leader.

If you lose your job and try to be employed elsewhere people might be afraid of hiring you and learning someone else's secret because it would be a violation of the NDA and lead to legal trouble.

That's not how it works.

You cannot duplicate your previous companies technology identically. You can continue the research that you started at your old company, and make the next generation of that technology at your new company. They can't take away what's in your head, merely specify that you can't use it in the exact same way. Which is fair enough, you should have to do at least *some* work to develop your new product, just stealing it wholesale from your old employer is...stealing.

If it's serious research, your contract will likely have a timed do-not-compete in it. The longest I've seen is a year; you're not allowed to produce a competing product (defined however they want to) for a year.

If you're a researcher, you're probably fairly bright. Bright people do not sign contracts that would lead to their career being ruined if they needed to change companies.

 

[Azuremen]

Most sensible businesses would guard patents with their life, just look at the billion dollar fights in the tech world over seemly tiny pieces of IP.

You mean legal advising higher ups to start lawsuits over the shape of icons? The comment about patents being a lottery ticket to a legal drawing is pretty accurate. On top of that, China just ignores IP entirely and makes cheap copies of everything... and the quality shows.

Current IP laws are an absolutely joke in this day and age, and Musk is possibly making a statement about that. Especially with the companies built entirely on patent lawsuits acquired from purchasing defunct companies.

 

[Keef]

Is this a milestone in the evolution of motoring?

No. But it is Tesla not being ******. It's also a PR stunt, basically saying our stuff is so good that you need to copy it to compete so here ya go.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

No. But it is Tesla not being ******. It's also a PR stunt, basically saying our stuff is so good that you need to copy it to compete so here ya go.

If you want to be myopic and look at it cynically sure.

 

[Nurburgthing.]

Some people have a glass that is half full.

Others take the glass and smash it on the ground whilst frowning and muttering.

Since when was sharing a bad thing? So what if it's a PR stunt, isn't drumming up publicity a part of business ownership?

Not sure how or why people would put a negative spin on this ^?

Well done Tesla, if only more companies would do the same.

This 👍.

 

[Keef]

If you want to be myopic and look at it cynically sure.

If I was a company so innovative that nobody wants to let me sell my cars directly, a concept so simple a child could've come up with it, I'd be pretty cocky as well. Tesla is going places and nobody is doing a very good job of competing.

 

[homeforsummer]

If I was a company so innovative that nobody wants to let me sell my cars directly, a concept so simple a child could've come up with it, I'd be pretty cocky as well. Tesla is going places and nobody is doing a very good job of competing.

I do like Musk's take on the open source patents too. I'm paraphrasing here as I don't recall where I read it, but he said something along the lines of "we'd not be doing much for the future of transport if we put landmines behind us on the path we're taking".

 

[SlipZtrEm]

IMO, Musk is more than justified in his self-assured nature. That quote that @homeforsummer mentions is exactly why I'm more of a Tesla fan each passing month.

 

[niky]

It's great PR... but I'm with @Imari in thinking it's nothing much more than a marketing move. Everyone who's serious about producing EVs in the future already has their own R&D program. Everyone who's producing EVs now or in the near future is already tooling up, and retooling to copy someone's secondhand designs from a few years back doesn't make business sense.

Given economies of scale... if you want Tesla tech, you might as well pay Tesla and buy whole drivetrain or chassis assemblies off of them rather than duplicate their production capacity.

It's a nice gesture, though.

 

[Pupik]

The point is you can have business without IP. IP is a fabrication to make lawyers rich and people miserable.

Either that, or...ten other corporations copy it, then the case goes to Supreme Court, and they say "if it's publicly widespread...too bad, no more patent" and the end result is Big Government Is The Bully. Can't really have it both ways, but I guess it depends if the nine justices are having a bad intellectual property debate day or not.

Anyhow, I can't help but be impressed. Public relations or not, Elon Musk knows it's going to be 3-4 years until he has some serious competition; never mind that much of what "we have learned" about electric vehicles will probably be even more advanced in the next decade, so much as to make many of his designs obsolete.

Perhaps he wants to be known like his company's namesake?

 

[Azuremen]

It's great PR... but I'm with @Imari in thinking it's nothing much more than a marketing move. Everyone who's serious about producing EVs in the future already has their own R&D program. Everyone who's producing EVs now or in the near future is already tooling up, and retooling to copy someone's secondhand designs from a few years back doesn't make business sense.

It might be a move to help standardize charge systems by giving everyone access to Tesla's current rapid charge stations. Certainly better than trying to play a Sony and control all licensing and rights to a technology that will be broadly adopted over the future.

 

[niky]

That's one angle that Tesla could possibly take. If other people start following the same charging standards, Tesla could charge other EV users for use of their superchargers.

-

And more superchargers by other manufacturers would make the use and fueling of Tesla cars much easier.

-

But these are big "what ifs." It remains to be seen what the future charger standard will be. But at least Tesla has their foot in the door, on this one. And by assuring people that the system is not proprietary, they've strengthened their case considerably.

 

[Danoff]

The point is you can have business without IP. IP is a fabrication to make lawyers rich and people miserable.

You can have a business without IP, but IP is not a fabrication.

Tesla is correct that their patents lay obstacles in front of other car companies, that's why they applied for those patents. They innovated and invested and patented so that they could make money. They could have just not applied. By releasing their patents they allow other car companies to make more effective products, especially if Tesla's IP is valuable.

There is nothing different between doing this and saying:

"Here, we researched the hell out of this, spent millions, innovated, created, but we'll just hand it over to our competitors because we want to see what they make." No patents are involved in that statement. Any company can release the research they spent so much on if they want to.

Patents are a wonderful thing, and no company is obligated to use them. Can they be misused? Yes, just like any area of law. Does that mean that they are inherently bad? Not even remotely.

 

[Omnis]

Patents are a wonderful thing, and no company is obligated to use them. Can they be misused? Yes, just like any area of law. Does that mean that they are inherently bad? Not even remotely.

Based on what? Utilitarianism? You're taking that for granted.

• http://www.businesswire.com/portal/...d=news_view&newsId=20090701006334&newsLang=en
• http://arstechnica.com/science/2009/03/study-markets-provide-an-alternative-to-patent-monopolies/

Enforcing a monopoly through the state (violence) is inherently bad. It is literally a siphon of resources directly from production to lawyers.

Sadly, in the system we have you pretty much need them for legal defense purposes.

 

[Danoff]

Based on what? Utilitarianism? You're taking that for granted.

• http://www.businesswire.com/portal/...d=news_view&newsId=20090701006334&newsLang=en
• http://arstechnica.com/science/2009/03/study-markets-provide-an-alternative-to-patent-monopolies/

Enforcing a monopoly through the state (violence) is inherently bad. It is literally a siphon of resources directly from production to lawyers.

Sadly, in the system we have you pretty much need them for legal defense purposes.

No, based on the same exactly principles that say you can own any property. You have a state enforced monopoly (violence) on every piece of property you own, and it's not inherently bad. When those property rights are in dispute, lawyers siphon resources. That's the case if someone steals your car or your research.

 

[Keef]

Patents are a good idea. How they're currently implemented and enforced in the US is what needs overhauled. The idea of documenting and protecting ideas is in line with human rights but I definitely think how we document and protect them needs looked at because the system is out of control.

 

[Imari]

That's the case if someone steals your car or your research.

Except that there's a similar disparity between stealing a car and stealing research as there is with that other thing that's long been called stealing, piracy.

"Stealing" research does not deprive the original owner of the research. It is not theft in the sense of property theft, and shouldn't be treated as such.

There are valid reasons for giving protection to research and idea production, and they're all to do with incentivising people to actually do the research in the first place. Patents should focus on that, instead of the bogus "it's mah propertah" angle.