Another example is oil drilling tech industry, wherein the exploration/drilling companies demand % of profits - indirectly becoming stakeholders by strength of tech and logistics, while still keeping the core tech rights all the time, and firm grip on standards and specs.
And well they should. Not only do they fund the tech and logistics (without any guarantee that it will work), they also drill at their own risk after competitive bidding. They get paid through 'cost oil' and 'profit oil' mechanisms. In this, they are direct
stakeholders: they take all the upfront risk and get paid out over time.
Why would they want to share the tech and put themselves out of business?
Indian rules about O&G are interesting: if you strike oil, you cannot export it, you must sell it back in India at prices that are lower than international ones, you must treat any gas from the wells separately etc. This means bidders figure in these costs into the 'cost oil'.
I have been hearing about ToT since some guy at the IBRD coined it in the 1960s. It started with the idea that in place like India, the way to utilize skilled labor (R&D) locally before they became part of the 'brain drain', was to move low-end research to 'LDCs'.
I know a little about this: I wrote one of my papers on how ITT should do this but laced it with 'social' and 'moral' obligations
. The Chief Scientist at ITT was quite polite, even invited me to lunch.
Ultimately, this theme manifested itself in such things as the Jack Welch institute in BLR. I doubt however, their work ever seeps into every day Indian life.