I think the presence of institutions like the IIHS, the safety tests done, and the importance placed on safety by consumers would simply encourage other manufacturers to license the invention. Remember, at the time, manufacturers decided not to include seat belts at all, because they didn't want people to think cars weren't safe. The market is very different, now, and if there were some invention that came along that had as great an impact as the three-point belt I'm sure you would see other manufacturers license or copy it.

You don't have to go far or wonder up scenarios.

Just look at what happens to ANY safety patent, save from this one.

none of them are free. they all carry royalties. Better yet, get away from automobiles and look at medical patents. The most lucrative ones are for disposable cathereres(not sure the word in english). they are sometimes nothing more than a straw and a needle. yet patents abound.

How many lives could them save with each safety or health patent? Should we draw a line that if a patent is useful it should be free? ...that goes directly opposite to the justification of a patent to begin with.

You cant compare Volvo then and Volvo now.

But if the question is- would a young Swedish researcher today consider giving away an important invention that would help the world...I think it could still happen.

But back then, it's not like seat belts were mandatory on autos. Heck, there was probably quite the resistance to wearing them for a decade or two as well.. Volvo had to SELL the idea of a seat belt, it's not like the other companies were falling all over themselves to get this new feature, at least in the beginning.