The Benefits of Sharing—Nice Guys and Girls do Finish First - Open-Source Lab: How to Build Your Own Hardware and Reduce Research Costs - page 29

has a historical large share of business in the scientific optics field would be threatened from
recent advancements [ 54 ] . However, this does not appear to be true. The Chronicle of Higher
Education reported that Edmund Optics welcomes the approach. Their view bolsters the fun-
damental premise of this topic. Edmund Optics believes that in the near future, it is likely that
many (or all) scientists and engineers will manufacture their own lab equipment using open-
source hardware designs. This will undoubtedly cost the company some of its product line.
However, Edmund Optics feels that successful manufacturing companies will continue to play
a role in making equipment that meets higher precision standards than are possible with the
current capabilities of 3-D printers [ 55 ] . So, for example, although a lens holder can be printed
with a low-cost 3-D printer today, scientists would still need to buy the lens and better yet they
may be willing to buy even more lenses because they can print more complicated optical ex-
perimental mechanical systems. As open-source 3-D printing continues to evolve and scient-
ists obtain the ability to print lenses, Edmund Optics and any other scientific equipment man-
ufacturer will be needed to continually innovate to stay in business. Edmund Optics believes
they are up to the challenge. With their positive welcoming of the innovation surge brought
on by the open-source hardware paradigm, it is highly probable that Edmund Optics will con-
tinue to play a leading role in scientific equipment supply. Companies that attempt to ight
the tidal wave of innovation with antiquated IP-related litigation are likely to be swept away
by history. The botom line is that companies that are unable or unwilling to innovate are no
longer viable.

2.6 Concluding Thoughts
This chapter explored both the extremely pragmatic and self-serving advantages to your
group for joining the open-source scientific community for your equipment and instrumenta-
tion, but it also showed how the human hard-wiring for cooperation provides both our species
and our organizations and industries a distinct competitive advantage. The legal and licensing
issues involved in best capitalizing on the opportunities for advanced sharing are discussed in
the next chapter.

References
1. Lieberwiz RL. Educational law: the corporatization of academic research: whose in-
terests are served? Akron Law Rev . 2005;38(759):764-765.
2. Chan AS, Fisher D. Exchange university: corporatization of academic culture . Vancouver:
University of British Columbia Press; 2008.
3. Gelman IJ. Opinion: missing methods . Scientist 2012; Available from: htp://the-scient-
ist.com/2012/05/03/opinion-missing-methods/ ; 2012; [accessed 9.05.12].
4. Weber S. The political economy of open source software . Berkeley Roundtable on the Inter-
national Economy, Working Paper 2000; 140.
5. Levy S. Hackers: heroes of the computer revolution . New York: Doubleday; 1984.
6. Bergquist M, Ljungberg J. The power of gifts: organizing social relationships in open
source communities. Open Inf Syst J . 2001;11:305-320.
7. Bessen J, Maskin E. Sequential innovation, patents, and imitation. RAND J Econ .
2009;40(4):611-635.

8. Pearce JM. Open source research in sustainability. Sustainability: J Rec .

2012;5(4):238-243.