Although this does require for the current theories are in fact correct. Many times beofe there has been a paradigmatic shift in the very core of scientific theory. Look at Carbon 60 which brought a hithertoo unthinkable substance into the scientific consciousness.
Although I err on the side of caution here, maybe this is another g-wave or cold fusion where erronious results are attempting to have a theory bound around them, and no body but the origonal claimant can re-create them
Remember, that which is deemed to be science is that which the majority of scientsts agree upon at any one moment in time...
The loss is the opportunity cost. If they have a potential to make 18 million the loss is the shortfall of the money from wha they should earn. In this case it would be seen in a loss of profits (or more likely in e-commerce a greater negative income...)
In the very least he is challenging peoples perceptions of the norm and saying that it is ok to branch out and be different from the sheep. In the same way that Orlan is challenging peoples perception of what is beauty in this day and age he seems to have thought hard about what he is doing, especially the fact that man is animal not some special being.
You jest, but this has been attempted. An italian artist payed a model to be decorated with art and then the partnership disolved and the artist took the model to court to try to recover the artwork through having the skin removed..... Oh, and it would be artistic copyright rather than patent, unless the process involved in the tehnique was origonal...
Slashdot Mirror
Although this does require for the current theories are in fact correct. Many times beofe there has been a paradigmatic shift in the very core of scientific theory. Look at Carbon 60 which brought a hithertoo unthinkable substance into the scientific consciousness.
Although I err on the side of caution here, maybe this is another g-wave or cold fusion where erronious results are attempting to have a theory bound around them, and no body but the origonal claimant can re-create them
Remember, that which is deemed to be science is that which the majority of scientsts agree upon at any one moment in time...
The loss is the opportunity cost. If they have a potential to make 18 million the loss is the shortfall of the money from wha they should earn. In this case it would be seen in a loss of profits (or more likely in e-commerce a greater negative income...)
In the very least he is challenging peoples perceptions of the norm and saying that it is ok to branch out and be different from the sheep. In the same way that Orlan is challenging peoples perception of what is beauty in this day and age he seems to have thought hard about what he is doing, especially the fact that man is animal not some special being.
You jest, but this has been attempted. An italian artist payed a model to be decorated with art and then the partnership disolved and the artist took the model to court to try to recover the artwork through having the skin removed..... Oh, and it would be artistic copyright rather than patent, unless the process involved in the tehnique was origonal...