[p2p-research] Fwd: Dual Licensing of Research in Renewable Energy

Tue Jun 16 11:20:48 CEST 2009

Hi Austin,

I think this kind of debate is not a pollution neither of our p2p nor of the
open manufacturing list, but there's always the possibility of using our
ning forum as well,

see http://p2pfoundation.ning.com/

I will return to this email shortly,

Michel

On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 4:00 PM, Austin <brentley at gmail.com> wrote:

>  Hello Michel (and hello to fellow collaborators),
>
> That is a good question.
>
> I think the main issue with dual licensing (DL) is enforcement.  This is
> easy enough to accomplish when you're comparing lines of code between the
> commercial version and the original version of a FOSS project.  In fact,
> there are even programs out there that can tell you exactly what percentage
> of your original work is in future derivatives.  This seems like it would be
> harder to do with research, technology, and other forms of IP.  For example,
> let's say I create a open prototype of a fuel cell.  I give it to the
> community for improvements and collaboration.  A manufacturing firm uses
> many different aspects of the original design to create a product for
> market.  How do I track this (especially since they might never contact me
> prior to production).  And how can I prove ownership (or at least the
> community's ownership)?  If this were strictly FOSS, I probably wouldn't
> mind as much...free riding is actually central to open-source, and I only
> need a small percentage of commercial products to cover the minimal expenses
> of designing the code.  In other words, I might not always mind if some
> commercial vendors choose to cheat the system and not create a DL agreement
> with me when they use my source code.
>
> While FOSS can use DL quite easily, I'm not 100% sure that this can be
> applied to other types of innovation.....Open design often has more
> significant expenses, depending on the industry (my paper is on renewable
> energy).  CAD software, theory, computers, and internet connections are all
> quite cheap, but wind turbines, solar cells, and associated lab equipment
> often require significant R&D inputs for which one would need generous
> funding.  Currently, only universities and research parks are able to
> achieve the budgets and economies of scale necessary for some energy-related
> projects.  I'm quite new to open source and P2P, but in my perfect world,
> there would be some centralized research entity (initially funded by
> investors and eventually sustained by royalties)...surrounded by a global
> network of garage and basement contributors who shared their individual
> findings.  And in my even more perfect world, the license would be ex-post,
> meaning that only successful products actually generate royalties (meaning
> there is no risk to use the research...you only pay if you are commercially
> successful...this would further lower barriers to entry and more companies
> could race to bring commercial products to market...which is great for
> end-users).
>
> The problem is tracking, enforcement, and litigation.  How do we ensure
> that manufacturers comply with the DL arrangement....especially if the
> royalty is only after the fact.  The goal is to keep legal fees to a minimum
> which means that IP and derivatives must be unambiguous, easy to compare,
> and transparent.
>
> Hope this clarifies things.  I also created an online powerpoint
> presentation (15 slides or so) to show my supervisor.  This might further
> clarify what I hope to achieve:
> http://docs.google.com/Presentation?docid=dcdkrjn7_0dj22q9gn&hl=en.
>
> Depending on the responses I receive, my research will focus on the
> critical success factors of this project (what will it take to make it
> work)....or, it will focus on buy in (would investors, institutional
> scientists, freelance scientists, and renewable energy manufacturers want to
> participate in such an project).
>
> Thanks to you all.  So strange that I started off focusing exclusively on
> renewable energy, but now found myself becoming a novice patent researcher.
>
> Thanks Michel and Community,
>
> -Austin
>
> BTW, do you all already have an online forum where I could simply create a
> conversation thread....I don't want to flood anyone's inboxes....and those
> who contribute can build on what others have said.
>
>
>
>
> Michel Bauwens wrote:
>
> Dear friends,
>
> Thanks for reading through this request/proposal of a new funding mechanism
> for open hardware research
>
> Austin, a little question. Since dual licensing works with FOSS, and is at
> the basis of different open source companies, why would it not work, or work
> differently with open design, since that is equally an immaterial process?
>
> Michel
>
>
>
> *From:* Austin <brentley at gmail.com>
> *To:* michelsub2003 at yahoo.com
> *Sent:* Thursday, June 11, 2009 1:38:47 PM
> *Subject:* Dual Licensing of Research
>
> Hello Michel,
>
> My name is Austin and I recently came across your article (
> http://www.we-magazine.net/we-volume-02/the-emergence-of-open-design-and-open-manufacturing/)
> concerning open manufacturing..  I found this piece very encouraging since
> over the past several weeks, I have been outlining a research paper for
> school in which a self-sustaining business model could actually help speed
> up R&D in the renewable energy sector.  I realize, after reading your
> article, that my business model is not nearly as "new" as I had previous
> believed....although my approach has a few key differences.
>
> I can only imagine how busy you must be, but I was hoping you might provide
> some clarity concerning dual licensing in an open innovation business
> model.  I think a very brief background on the actual idea might make my
> questions easier to frame.  the basic components are:
>
>
>    - Investors pool money into a research firm (we'll call it Green R&D)
>    - Green R&D works exclusively on renewable technology.  They pay for
>    the labs, scientists, etc.
>    - The research is posted online periodically so that anyone and
>    everyone can contribute, ask questions, make recommendations etc....the
>    information is essentially in the commons under a "public" license of
>    sorts..
>    - Solar panel or Wind turbine companies can use this growing body of
>    research to bring products to market.
>    - Green R&D receives an ex post royalty (under a dual license) from any
>    successful products created by these solar panel and wind turbine companies.
>     - Green R&D pays out dividends to initial investors and/or uses these
>    royalties to fund additional research.
>
> Energy companies have lower R&D costs since they benefit from Green R&D's
> public findings.  Innovation happens more quickly since the silo effect has
> been removed.  You still have market incentives (which help to pay for the
> research equipment).  And Green R&D only needs a few innovations to actually
> come to market...kind of how only a fraction of dual licensees in the open
> source world end up funding the entire Innovation Pool for everyone else (as
> you mentioned).
>
> As you can see, this model bears some similarities to the community-based
> innovation you discussed in your article....but as I mentioned, there are
> some major differences as well.
>
> This is the starting point of my research paper, but I've run into some
> difficulties...namely, measuring, monitoring, and enforcing the
> collaborative IP created under such a framework.  Dual-licensing is easy to
> implement in the digital world since source code can be monitored, tracked,
> and segmented.  Not so with research and other forms of technology.  As you
> pointed out, the manufacturing world (and to a lesser extent the research
> world) requires capital outlays that don't necessarily exist in open source
> communities.  Do you believe that dual licensing could work under the
> business model outlined above?
>
> Anyway, thanks in advance for any insights that you might be able to
> offer.  I'm a latecomer to the P2P, open source, and collaborative genres,
> but I really applaud what you are doing.
>
> Many regards,
>
> -Austin
>
>
>
>

-- 
Working at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhurakij_Pundit_University -
http://www.dpu.ac.th/dpuic/info/Research.html -
http://www.asianforesightinstitute.org/index.php/eng/The-AFI

Volunteering at the P2P Foundation:
http://p2pfoundation.net  - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net -
http://p2pfoundation.ning.com

Monitor updates at http://del.icio.us/mbauwens

The work of the P2P Foundation is supported by SHIFTN,
http://www.shiftn.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/attachments/20090616/33a3d7f0/attachment.html>