Who Owns the Failure to Develop A Product?
The company Palm recently pulled the plug on the development of a new product called Foleo. Foleo was to bridge the gap between a Palm Pilot and a laptop computer. Most people didn’t see the use is in such hardware and consequently its mocked and poorly received by tech reviewers. Apparently the company decided to scrap the whole project even if they had spent a considerable amount of money developing it.
It’s of interest to me because I wonder how Darwin would like to manage the ‘ownership’ in this case. Should the current employees have their wages garnished until their portion of the cost of the development is paid?
Or lets say estimates by credible experts in the field calculate that the success of Foleo will require the construction of a new manufacturing plant to meed demand. Should the theoretical laborers of this new plant be required to help offset the cost of development? Currently the developer is required to assume the cost of development with the right of ownership there after. If we implement the idea that laborers should be granted ownership would you advocate for laws forcing the potential laborers to pay for the development of a product that may result from the development? Would you advocate that laborers should help pay the cost of development even when the new product fails to materialize?
Principle of Ownership
Distributing ownership amongst the working class is one of the core principles of socialism and communism. Its hard to take at face value that one favors markets and capitalism when they ardently support a principle that is anathema to capitalism. Arguably the primary principles of capitalism is that those that take risk enjoy the ownership of the fruits of that risk. This is the principle that creates the incentive needed for capitalism to constantly innovate and generate new products. This is the principle that leads to massive economic growth providing wealth to even the poorest of the poor. This is the principle that is most consistent with the underlying biology of man.
Yet, some cry bloody murder when the laborer that has not invested a single scent in product development, construction of the manufacturing plant, or the establishment of a distribution system is not granted ‘ownership’ of the Ford Explorer after using the plant’s power driver to secure one of the wheels to the axle. Is it any wonder Communism and it’s wicked half sister Socialism fails to guarantee the promise of providing wealth to everyone? Woefully ignorant of the process of taking an idea of a product and making it available to consumers they seek to rectify the so-called injustice of the laborer’s pay in proportion to corporate gains by giving the laborer a disproportionate amount of ownership in relationship to their contribution in the manufacturing of that product.