@cazzie I think the person keeping this information to themselves is the criminal. They are essentially holding the potential welfare of millions hostage. They are the ones being unethical.
Being unethical and being criminal are two different things, no matter how one wants to put them on the same slice of bread. A person can do things that are unethical and still be above the bar set by civil or criminal law. If that be the case, how and when does group desire, or individual desire trump law as to who is criminal? Would that not go back to ”two wrongs doesn’t make a right?” When does this apply? If he was a land owner who had a piece of property that the whole community enjoyed but then decided to develop it into some strip mall that would have negative consequences on the neighborhood, if 27 out of 35 people in the neighborhood thought it was criminal of him to selfishly disrupt their lives and property value do they have the right to prevent him, even though he is doing everything according to law?
_This sort of stuff happens all the time. It is why there are research grants, but private and from the Government. There are established pathways to the validation or debunking of the data and holding to for ransom is NOT one of them. _
In essence isn’t a grant more akin to a crapshoot or investment in a discovery? If someone says they want to cure Parkinson’s and someone believes they can, they give the money. If someone thinks a cure for that can be found but no one yet has an inkling of how to do it, they give the money so someone can hunt for it. If a person by what lab test they have done has something they highly believe would be effective to treat humans because it worked on what animals or computer models they utilized, they already have something. For it to be held up to the flame, it has to be revealed to those who have better resources to fully vet it out to see if it holds water. If a person who legally owns the data says I am not allowing anyone to catch a whiff of this until X amount of dead Presidents materialize in my bank account, it maybe unethical, but it is still his/her property legally to dispose of, use, or trade as they see fit. It would be no different than any other physical invention. People have them, they don’t patent them if they do not have the money to fully divelope them because once they do, some big manufacture can change it enough to legally be called a different widget when it is really off the back of someone else. If a person believes that it getting out before they are compensated whatever they believe they are worth or should get, would have Big Pharm or someone else tweak it just enough to make it legally appear different but it his/her process, product, etc. they (Big Pharm) just ripped off.
That is why I would have no trouble taking a copy of his data because I’d be almost 100% sure it would be a bogus claim.
What if you were wrong, can you compensate for picking the guy/gal’s pocket? In reverse what if you had invented something by your test seemed to work, say an additive that increased gas mileage 38%, you do not have the money or facility to fully vet it out, so you figure you will sit on it unless you get an offer you believe your product/process is worth. What if someone got wind of it, even if you knew them well, and they leaked it out there because they thought the greater good for society and the world trumps your desire to be compensated for your sweat And effort, would you be cool with them taking your discovery against yo0ur will and just giving it away because they felt it should go that way?