X-Message-Number: 6503
Date: 12 Jul 96 02:14:33 EDT
From: Paul Wakfer <>
Subject: Fringe benefits of Prometheus ownership

In Cryonet #6490, Ken Stone wrote: (his correction of #6491 inserted)

>Paul Wakfer raised the question of 'what level of pledge' should a 
>cryonics provider have to make to Prometheus before it is allowed 
>royalty-free use of Promethean-derived technology.
>
>The answer: that provider should own 100% of Prometheus in order to 
>do this.  Granting royalty-free use to any cryonics companies would 
>erode the financial interests of all other shareholders.  Proceeds 
>deriving from Prometheus should be split equally amongst all 
>of its investors in direct proportion to their investments.  Anything
>else is a form of fraud, even when it is legally acceptable.

I was very glad to have this reply from Ken (where is your pledge, BTW? :),
because exactly the same thoughts had crossed my mind. Let me make several
points of explanation and elaboration and then see if you have the same
fundamental objection.

1. Though this is not a justification for the morality of the idea, its
obvious purpose is to encourage the organizations to do some of my work for
me - to get their members or anyone else to donate to the organization so
that it can be a large enough share purchaser to get free use of the results
of the technology. It will not be an easy job to get this project funded. I
have to be prepared to use all possible strategies to accomplish this
promethean task. :)
2. It is not intended that the royalty free use would be for the entire
length of any patents which the company executing the project holds, only for
some specified number of years. I believe that I mentioned 10 years after the
discovery of the technology involved, but on further consideration, I think
that this might be best if it were only until the end of the project. The way
I see it no profits will be distributed and the company will not go public
until the end of the 10 years or the accomplishment of the Project goal
whichever comes first.
3. It *would* reduce the profit of other shareholders, but if these
conditions are stated right up-front then it cannot possibly be "fraud". Also
don't forget, any such thing that I come up with will have to be approved by
the pledgers before they sign their legally binding Share Purchase
Agreements.
4. The are many market situations where "volume buyers" get special prices or
privileges and the small buyers accept this as reasonable. So why not here?
5. In addition, I plan to give no special privileges to cryonics
organizations as such. *Anyone* or *any organization* who would put in the
amount stipulated for this privilege would be eligible for it. So if I set
the level at $100K per year as I am thinking, even Kaiser Permanente :) could
get royalty free use of the technology for the specified time periods by
putting in $100K per year for 10 years.
6. $100K per year should be relatively easy for a large organization like
Alcor. All they would need to do, would be to get a little over a quarter of
their members to each donate $1000 per year. My major problem with this idea
is that the vast difference in the size of the organizations makes it
virtually impossible for me to set a level which is high enough to rate the
privilege and yet possibly attainable by all cryonics organizations.


-- Paul --

!!!!! REVERSIBLE BRAIN CRYOPRESERVATION *CAN* BE ACHIEVED IN 10 YEARS !!!!!

Paul Wakfer  email:        Voice/Fax:     Pager:
US:     1220 E Washington St #24, Colton, CA 92324 909-481-4433 800-805-2870
Canada: 238 Davenport Rd #240, Toronto, ON M5R 1J6 416-968-6291 416-446-9461
(currently in Canada)


Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=6503