Tesla patent move - Real world obligations?

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

While you may believe that to be true, that's not within the scope of what they opened the patents for, so it's unfair to characterize them as not holding true to their word because they they aren't helping to build home packs out of them.

In addition, Tesla has already discussed that they plan to recycle the packs for new batteries, so they aren't ignoring the reuse idea.

I'm sure that they'll look at reuse, but they're trying to make dedicated new storage products. To be honest, I think that they'll be more likely to have internal reuse that rebuild and sell.

The patent blog note was just a message that they were open to patent swaps.

 

[stopcrazypp]

We don't see it this way, embracing open source philosophy really means they should be embracing open source hardware. BMW and Tesla and the community at large can all SHARE and work on better motors, inverters, BMS's, chargers TOGETHER. We are not talking about open source software only. No one expects Tesla to give away their wind river linux source code.

The thing is Tesla never promised or mentioned open source hardware (which is a different subject). Their blog post was only talking about the patents and nothing else.

Like you said patents are already open source so this whole thing sounds like a PR stunt to attract young idealist engineers who are going to be sadly disappointed. When is the last time you heard of a BMW suing Toyota or GM suing Ford anyways?

It's not just a PR stunt. Patents may be "open source" but the way they are licensed are not in the "open source philosophy". You might not hear a lot about suing, but there is plenty of paid licensing going on, for example:

Ford licensing 21 hybrid patents from Toyota (and on the same page Paice LLC sued Toyota for violations of their patent):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_Synergy_Drive#Ford

Here's Toyota licensing their hybrid patents to Mazda, Nissan, and Subaru (Fuji Heavy Industries):
http://www.edmunds.com/autoobserver...-to-mazda-in-addition-to-nissan-and-fuji.html

GM's patented "two-mode" hybrid design is also licensed to Daimler/Chrysler and BMW.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Hybrid_Cooperation

The most EV-rated patent issue is the patent encumbrance of NIMH batteries:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent_encumbrance_of_large_automotive_NiMH_batteries

What Tesla is doing differently is not requiring people who utilize their patents to pay royalties as long as it is used in a "good faith" manner. Tesla haven't defined what they mean exactly, but according to the post, the details will come later.

 

[magnet]

The thing is Tesla never promised or mentioned open source hardware (which is a different subject). Their blog post was only talking about the patents and nothing else.


It's not just a PR stunt. Patents may be "open source" but the way they are licensed are not in the "open source philosophy". You might not hear a lot about suing, but there is plenty of paid licensing going on, for example:

Ford licensing 21 hybrid patents from Toyota (and on the same page Paice LLC sued Toyota for violations of their patent):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_Synergy_Drive#Ford

Here's Toyota licensing their hybrid patents to Mazda, Nissan, and Subaru (Fuji Heavy Industries):
http://www.edmunds.com/autoobserver...-to-mazda-in-addition-to-nissan-and-fuji.html

GM's patented "two-mode" hybrid design is also licensed to Daimler/Chrysler and BMW.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Hybrid_Cooperation

The most EV-rated patent issue is the patent encumbrance of NIMH batteries:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent_encumbrance_of_large_automotive_NiMH_batteries

What Tesla is doing differently is not requiring people who utilize their patents to pay royalties as long as it is used in a "good faith" manner. Tesla haven't defined what they mean exactly, but according to the post, the details will come later.

Those are some good points. I just feel like are patents are bad for society in a lot of ways. I think it is great Elon realizes this also but just wish Tesla as a company were more Open in general. Who would not love to swap a P85 drivetrain into an BMW E9 or use the pack for their solar off grid floating home

"
, I thought patents were a good thing and worked hard to obtain them. And maybe they were good long ago, but too often these days they serve merely to stifle progress, entrench the positions of giant corporations and enrich those in the legal profession, rather than the actual inventors



Patents are no longer good: Elon Musk""""

 

[Red Sage]

The problem with the way patents had been used is twofold...

1. Companies were using them as roadblocks, to prevent anyone from using the same technology or exploring the same path, under pain of legal action.
2. Companies were forced to purchase licenses, even if they didn't want to use the specific patent, in order to insulate themselves from future litigation, because they had an idea that might be considered 'similar' or 'derivative' of the prior work.

The only alternatives were to either reinvent the wheel, or roll the dice by 'stealing' patents and building upon them while hoping you could fend off suits long enough to make money hand-over-fist anyway.

Elon Musk would like Tesla Motors to avoid such hurdles. I'm fairly certain that his prior statements make it very clear what he means by 'in good faith'... Just design and build a car as an electric vehicle from the outset; do not convert or modify an existing ICE to get there; do not offer a Petrol, CNG, Fuel Cell, or Hybrid version; give the car a range of 200 miles or more; use your manufacturing capacity to offer it as a true mass market vehicle at affordable prices. Do the opposite, while using their technology, and Tesla will sue.