zlacker

>>gkober+(OP)
Sounds to me like the "in good faith" clause is to retain the patents for a defense should someone try to come after Telsa for infringing.

Quite an interesting business move and pretty unprecedented as far as I know, at least for a non-software company. Presumably he is hoping that this will encourage improvement to infrastructure. He is also probably thinking he can build higher quality cars and cheaper than others, irrespective of if they are electric or not (probably this is true).

>>graeha+Y1
That is certainly the most plausible reading of that phrase, but it still seems like it could be put into a licence pretty easily, along the lines of "User of these patents hereby relinquishes all claims of infringement against Tesla Motors for any patents the user may own or license".

>>oddeva+N2
i read "in good faith" as "you may use these as you wish but don't turn around and try to sue us for using something you hold a patent for"

i could be totally off the mark though

>>jayrox+I5
I read it more along the lines of "you may use these as you wish but don't try to turn around and screw the electrification of transportation, harming humanity's future for your own short-term gain". Musk isn't doing it for money after all.

>>TeMPOr+E6
Tesla is a public company, Musk is reported to have a 32% stake [1], so is responsible to the other shareholders. If the decision didn't make business sense, he would expect to be replaced as Chairman and CEO.

There may be altruism and mission involved, but Tesla isn't (and shouldn't be) a charity.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elon_Musk#Tesla_Motors