use his invention. The many uses and attributions increase the value of the invention and publicity of the inventor. At the same time, all businesses have equal access to the invention and thus have equal opportunity to compete. . . . Did I get it right?
Against Attribution
Teacher: I think so. Now I believe we can summarize the arguments
against both positions and continue from there.
Kappa: To continue where?
Teacher: Ah! The best question! We must return to our main issue!
Beta: A summary is necessary anyway.
Teacher: OK. Anyone?
Alpha: My objections to Beta’s ideas stand.
Teacher: Please, Alpha.
Alpha: First, as a creator, I would not like to wait and see how other
people make money from my creative work and then pat me on
the back in gratitude, because that reference of yours is nothing
more than a pat on the back. It costs them nothing, while they
earn money and I don’t. I would not divulge any other invention in
that case. Second, nobody can provide all the zillions of references
anyway. So, some royalties paid for limited time would be a fair
working solution to all our problems. Thank you.
Against Royalties
Teacher: Thank you, Alpha. Any argument against royalties?
Alpha: Summary of argument.
Teacher: Right; we want a summary of what was argued against
royalties so far.
Kappa: May I?
Teacher: You bet.
Kappa: First, if there are two businesses based on the same idea,
they compete using normal business means, such as marketing,
productivity, and so forth. Now if we, for some reason, take
money from one and give it to the other, the second would have
an advantage. Competition would be hampered, and so forth. I
