This. If Stark developed the arc reactor with profits from his work for the government, that doesn't mean that the government has ownership of it, any more than the government has ownership of the personal property of a federal employee.
Tony Stark's politics
- Thread starter Data Soong
- Start date
Recall, that Stark Industrries had made the arc-reactor in the 1960s, it's hard to know what the relationship between SI and the US government was back then. Howard Stark aided the government during WW2 and likely did his whole life but I think in IM1 during the info-dump about SI it seems implied that the government contracts didn't start until Stark died and Stain took over. Or at least that's when SI ratcheted up it's focus to weaponry and then likely scored the big government contracts.
It's also said that the industrial-sized arc-reactor was little more than a prototype/"science experiment" SI built in the 1960s in order to "shut the hippies up," likely meaning it was done to show that they had other projects beyond making weapons.
It's hard to strictly know what the contract is between SI and the US government and it could be that any "weapon" developed by SI is considered to be government property or that the government has some "right" to overlook and have access to. I mean, the suit was made when SI still was the weapons contractor the government likely though they had a right to see this "weapon" in order to use it per the contract.
Stark in IM1 had only suspended their weapons program, when it officially ended is uncertain but likely between IM1 and 2.
Stark was obviously concerned at first about the government finding out about the suit as when he built the MK2 he did it "off the corporate servers" and held locally to his Malibu home, as he had asked Jarvis to do. (This is before Stark is certain about there being an internal mole in his company, that the weapons in the Afghani compound were stolen.)
Then we get to his arguments in the hearing in IM2 where he maintained that the government had no rights to the IM suit per their contract. So, regardless of real-world contracts, the government in the MCU obviously felt entitled -per their contract with SI- to the Iron Man suit(s.)
It's also said that the industrial-sized arc-reactor was little more than a prototype/"science experiment" SI built in the 1960s in order to "shut the hippies up," likely meaning it was done to show that they had other projects beyond making weapons.
It's hard to strictly know what the contract is between SI and the US government and it could be that any "weapon" developed by SI is considered to be government property or that the government has some "right" to overlook and have access to. I mean, the suit was made when SI still was the weapons contractor the government likely though they had a right to see this "weapon" in order to use it per the contract.
Stark in IM1 had only suspended their weapons program, when it officially ended is uncertain but likely between IM1 and 2.
Stark was obviously concerned at first about the government finding out about the suit as when he built the MK2 he did it "off the corporate servers" and held locally to his Malibu home, as he had asked Jarvis to do. (This is before Stark is certain about there being an internal mole in his company, that the weapons in the Afghani compound were stolen.)
Then we get to his arguments in the hearing in IM2 where he maintained that the government had no rights to the IM suit per their contract. So, regardless of real-world contracts, the government in the MCU obviously felt entitled -per their contract with SI- to the Iron Man suit(s.)
@FPAlpha: Again, the striking logo similarity and lack of mentions of real-world defense contractors strongly implies that Stark Industries is a fictionalization of Lockheed Martin or Northrop Grumman, and those companies, as I understand it, simply don't make civilian products such as vacuum cleaners or smart phones, in large part because they would likely have to have entirely separate divisions to ensure that they gained no unfair advantages from the government-contracted work. Consider this dialogue:Notice he doesn't add "and electric cars, energy-efficient dishwashers, and world-class vibrators", and nor does Tony.
Obidiah: Tony, we're a weapons manufacturer.
Tony: Obie, I just don't want a body count to be our only legacy.
Obidiah: That's what we do. We're iron mongers. We make weapons.
Tony: Obie, I just don't want a body count to be our only legacy.
Obidiah: That's what we do. We're iron mongers. We make weapons.
No duh. But I think, given the evidence, it's more realistic to assume the original arc reactor was built as part of a defense contract and that the filmmakers are unconcerned with the real-world implications of such a detail than to suppose it wasn't.
Even within defence contracts - I don't think the govt owns or controls the IPR? They might have an exclusively on the sale of Weapon X but that generally does not prevent IPR being used in the future for another project.
Gaith builds an interesting house of cards but that's all it is.
Gaith builds an interesting house of cards but that's all it is.
IIRC all that was really said about the original arc reactor prototype was that it was (overtly, at least) a publicity stunt built to "shut the hippies up". That Howard was really after reproducing the material properties of the tesseract is besides the point.
If it was a government contract then 1) Obadiah probably wouldn't have been under the aforementioned impression and 2) it'd be in some DoD warehouse, not sitting in a privately owned facility. I imagine the Pentagon are very finicky about that sort of thing.
Not even the parts used to create the Mk1 reactor and platform were US Gov property as they were from weapons sold under the table direct from Stark Industries.
What the Senator in IM2 seemed to be going for was an eminent domain bid, not an attempt to reclaim government property.
If it was a government contract then 1) Obadiah probably wouldn't have been under the aforementioned impression and 2) it'd be in some DoD warehouse, not sitting in a privately owned facility. I imagine the Pentagon are very finicky about that sort of thing.
Not even the parts used to create the Mk1 reactor and platform were US Gov property as they were from weapons sold under the table direct from Stark Industries.
What the Senator in IM2 seemed to be going for was an eminent domain bid, not an attempt to reclaim government property.
The government could quite possibly own all the designs for the giant arc reactor powering Stark Industries, but I doubt it. Maybe it was built directly with gov't funding, maybe as a side project related to a defense contract, maybe an independent project to, as someone said, "keep the hippies happy." A lot of defense contractors are involved in commercial ventures that bring in a lot of money, so who's to say?
The Jericho project, with its repulsor tech, was being demonstrated to the military as a concept. Maybe it was funded in whole by SI, maybe not. I don't remember any reference to where the funding came from.
But it was explicitly stated by an SI engineer that they couldn't duplicate Tony's miniature version of the arc reactor. A whole new design? I think so.
The MkI was built from pieces of the Jericho, but also a lot of new tech invented by Tony in the cave.
The Iron Man MkII was brand new, designed and built by Tony (and Jarvis), in his home workshop. Based on the MkI, but with a ton of new research and invented technology.
In IM2, the new "element" for the miniature arc reactor was synthesized by Tony from his father's research. No outside funding there, though he was being watched by SHIELD.
I think it's a big stretch to say that, since some of the tech Tony used in creating the MkI was funded by government contracts, the patents for subsequent designs would necessarily be owned by the government.
ETA: Regardless of where any funding might originate, whoever files a patent is the one who owns it until it expires.
The Jericho project, with its repulsor tech, was being demonstrated to the military as a concept. Maybe it was funded in whole by SI, maybe not. I don't remember any reference to where the funding came from.
But it was explicitly stated by an SI engineer that they couldn't duplicate Tony's miniature version of the arc reactor. A whole new design? I think so.
The MkI was built from pieces of the Jericho, but also a lot of new tech invented by Tony in the cave.
The Iron Man MkII was brand new, designed and built by Tony (and Jarvis), in his home workshop. Based on the MkI, but with a ton of new research and invented technology.
In IM2, the new "element" for the miniature arc reactor was synthesized by Tony from his father's research. No outside funding there, though he was being watched by SHIELD.
I think it's a big stretch to say that, since some of the tech Tony used in creating the MkI was funded by government contracts, the patents for subsequent designs would necessarily be owned by the government.
ETA: Regardless of where any funding might originate, whoever files a patent is the one who owns it until it expires.
Now I totally want to see Ron Swanson as Iron Man (love your avatar, by the way).
Actually, it was built from anything but. The terrorists wanted Stark to build a Jericho for them, so they wouldn't have already had one.
But when Tony is talking to the reporter woman he does mention advanced medical tech and "intellicrops," clearly implying that Stark Industries does have non-weapons output. They might make most of their money from bombs and guns but not all of it.
But there were several fired Jerichos in the area, as shown in the movie by the demonstration. Tony's captors found the pieces of the MkI, why wouldn't they have collected the parts of the Jerichos?
That aside, they already had a bunch of Stark weapons stockpiled. Plenty of stuff to work with.
I'm not sure how much use what's left of a fired missile that had successfully discharged its warhead would be to them. They clearly had plenty of other Stark weapons, that was a major plot point.
The Government didn't own the Jericho. That was the point of the demonstration, he was selling it to them.
He said he would throw in one of those martini mixing devices for every purchase of 500 mill or more. He told Stane that they were going to have an "early Christmas".
He said he would throw in one of those martini mixing devices for every purchase of 500 mill or more. He told Stane that they were going to have an "early Christmas".
Exactly, even if it was made out of one, it was still Tony's property at that point, since no working Jerico's were in military hands.
Well, we all know why that hearing was even assembled now because of Winter Soldier, the claim wasn't legal or above board anyway.
It was all just under the guise of America claiming a highly advanced weapon as it's property to prevent it being entirely in private hands.
But it could still have been argued in that event that either the suit or the reactor, or both, were as Tony said, necessary prosthesis.
Pepper did have problems getting War Machine back, that even Stark Industries lawers couldn't demand the Mark II back once Rhodey took it.
But it looks like they reached some "arrangment" with that by IM3. The same way Tony helped out with the Insight Class carriers in Winter Soldier, but still handed over only what he felt they needed.
You're trying to put Stark Industries into a corner it just doesn't fit. Yes, they may be a primarily weapons development and producing company but since SI would only take a hit and not cease to be one can assume they have other venues.
Let's take a look at Lockheed Martin (since you use them as an example over and over again) via Wikipedia.
It says that a little over 70% of their revenue comes from military contracts but they are also an aerospace and technology company which may acount for the rest of the revenue.
So given be the lines in the movie about the fallout after Tony's declaration it's safe to assume (at least to me, you will probably argue otherwise) that SI has a lower percentage of that tied up to the military. If Stark was CEO of Lockheed Martin and pulled that stunt the stocks would crash through the floor immediately and if he indeed would disband the military division would likely remain there for the time being.
So once again i believe Stark has way more irons in the fire than just military tech.. Tony Stark is a tech freak (for lack of a better word) and believes that everything can be solved by technology so it's safe to assume that Stark Industries is more a tech company but uses military funding because it provides huge amounts of money.
Good point about patents, hadn't thought of it. If we assume Howard Stark did the legwork of the arc reactor and filed the patents one can also assume that it expired as patents only last 20 years with a max. 5 years extension. My only gripe with this thing is why SI industries doesn't use it on a large scale in all factories because it apparently provides more power than it needs to work, maybe it's very maintenance intensive so it's not commercially viable on a larger scale which may be the reason why other companies are not using it.
It might have something to do with the fact that arc reactor technology is extremely weaponisable. That artificial element alone probably makes refined plutonium look like a lump of carbon by comparison. I think it's understandable that they're taking baby steps getting that technology into general use. Clearly the NY Stark Tower was one such step.
Weapons are but a small use for the element, it is entirely possible that Howard Stark was tryingto replicate the tesseract. And as it pointed out to me recently the new element Tony made in Iron Man 2 might be close to teh tesseract, since Loki was unable to turn his mind.
When Stark built the arc reactor in the desert he was a slave.
That would void his citizenship as well as his power of attorney.
The men that owned him, at that point were the true owners of modern ARC technology, not the US Government who's contract with Stark had lapsed after his dehumanization and disenfranchisement.
That would void his citizenship as well as his power of attorney.
The men that owned him, at that point were the true owners of modern ARC technology, not the US Government who's contract with Stark had lapsed after his dehumanization and disenfranchisement.