[bordercases]

What behavior would prevent a technology like ultra-cheap phased arrays from being locked up due to the corporation seeing some potential in either the technology or the team to buy them, but then not giving both the leeway to develop the market for the technology further?

In this specific case I guess we don't know the full picture of what Lattice Semiconductor intends to do, but there are many examples in software of startups getting acquihired and then the team dissolving into new projects that are more familiar or closely aligned with the pre-existing business model of the company.

Since it's always possible to just turn the startup into a subsidiary I'm sometimes confused as to why this happens, unless if it's an issue of maybe brand dilution or the market opportunity being too small to be worth the overhead of keeping a separate entity tied to a larger one. Which is a part of why more opportunities for low-growth or long-tail companies would be important, since now in the case where the means for bringing the IP to the market are eliminated no one gets anything at all.

[ethbro]

Use-it-or-lose-it provisions for all acquired technology, by entities over a certain size?

If you are demonstrably developing a piece of technology, kudos. It's yours, you bought its owner.

If you are not doing anything with it, you're required to offer FRAND license terms to anyone interested in the technology.

Would at least make the tech available that's currently getting tossed in a corporate closet in the basement.