Open Metal Detector Project Charter

[chudster]

Midas,

Sid is kind of right.

If you do not act quickly but were aware of the infringement, the court may not grant an injunction (eg stopping you from selling) and that is a key thing because for a small player it chokes off money supply to defend the action. I also imagine that the behaviour of the parties might be important in any damages determination.

But you are also right that their slow action does not make it go away.

Chudster

[sido]

Unfortunetly Sid I don't believe there is any onus on a patent holder to enforce a patent as soon as they become aware of an infringement or 'forever hold their peace'. If they want to wait till you've got an established business so that your actually worth suing then thats their right. If you are really obvious about it AND the company offered others use of the IP under license then they probably would have an obligation to their licencies to act. But as far as I'm aware though ML don't offer their tech to anyone else under license, so when and whether they sue or not probably comes down to what will be most profitable for them.

Midas

Hi Midas, we keep missing the point here. I am talking about new designs here such as Moodz, Tinkerer's schematics etc. Not referring to known IP that maybe is being developed here further that has potential to fuel fire for such big Companies and eventually giving them a reason to sue anybody in court.

We do not know the breach of IP that was infringed with the current case ATM but we can assume it has something to do with the approach in timing and processing of such data in a way that conflicts a existing Companies IP.

I am saying, ferinstance take Moodz idea in this case, send it off to whoever may have a concern. Let it known to whoever has a interest and then go about your business in further developing your idea IF no infringement of existing IP is breached.

Sid

[sido]

Midas,

I also imagine that the behaviour of the parties might be important in any damages determination.

Chudster

Chudster, sure is the case in any defense in such court appearances.

Sid

[Midas]

Hi Midas, we keep missing the point here. I am talking about new designs here such as Moodz, Tinkerer's schematics etc. Not referring to known IP that maybe is being developed here further that has potential to fuel fire for such big Companies and eventually giving them a reason to sue anybody in court.

We do not know the breach of IP that was infringed with the current case ATM but we can assume it has something to do with the approach in timing and processing of such data in a way that conflicts a existing Companies IP.

I am saying, ferinstance take Moodz idea in this case, send it off to whoever may have a concern. Let it known to whoever has a interest and then go about your business in further developing your idea IF no infringement of existing IP is breached.

Sid

Yeah no one wants to infringe IP. I'm just saying letting a company know what your doing or planning on doing doesn't mean they are neccessarilly going to tell you straight away if you are infringing. You really need to hire your own patent lawyer. What would be really nice, not sure if its realistic (or realistically priced), would be an indemnification from a law firm where they agree to cover you in the event you are sued at some point in the future.

Midas

[Carl-NC]

One of the drawbacks of self-production is that you are now personally liable for infringement. As Midas says, you need to hire a patent attorney and do due diligence in ensuring you're clear of patents.

[sido]

Yeah no one wants to infringe IP. I'm just saying letting a company know what your doing or planning on doing doesn't mean they are neccessarilly going to tell you straight away if you are infringing. You really need to hire your own patent lawyer. What would be really nice, not sure if its realistic (or realistically priced), would be an indemnification from a law firm where they agree to cover you in the event you are sued at some point in the future.

Midas

Your right about a Company not being obliged to respond. Although a Company in receipt of such documents and in there best interest in protecting there IP if breached, will take necessary steps to prevent such infringements occurring if its found to be the case. The court system will ask....were you aware of such impending own IP infringements and the question will be also be asked......what did you do about it at that time known.

Sid

[sido]

One of the drawbacks of self-production is that you are now personally liable for infringement. As Midas says, you need to hire a patent attorney and do due diligence in ensuring you're clear of patents.

Carl, by being open, honest and also have taken reasonable steps to avoid IP infringements, you are minimizing the risk of being sued for damages in lost revenue etc....

What your saying is that the current new designs presented here are in breach of somebodys IP in some way and whatever is presented open here is worth ziltch in whatever value is put on it???. Well if that is the case it makes me wonder what this forum is all about after all.

Sid

[moodz]

Hi Midas, we keep missing the point here. I am talking about new designs here such as Moodz, Tinkerer's schematics etc. Not referring to known IP that maybe is being developed here further that has potential to fuel fire for such big Companies and eventually giving them a reason to sue anybody in court.

We do not know the breach of IP that was infringed with the current case ATM but we can assume it has something to do with the approach in timing and processing of such data in a way that conflicts a existing Companies IP.

I am saying, ferinstance take Moodz idea in this case, send it off to whoever may have a concern. Let it known to whoever has a interest and then go about your business in further developing your idea IF no infringement of existing IP is breached.

Sid

What ... send it off so they can copy it ??

I have already put a plan in place ...I have legally transferred ownership of my IP to a holding company.....the holding company has placed a value of 0$ on the IP ( as it is not being sold / manufactured etc etc and it is only a cost to them in terms of development , patenting etc etc ) ..however I am subcontracted ( not employed ) by the company to develop and work on ideas which I then transfer to them for no consideration ( as I am contracted by them to develop the ideas ... so they own my output effectively ) ...

However .... I own shares in the company .... if the IP ever does become worth something ( patent, product , licencing etc etc ) ... then I will get a return because I am a voting shareholder and the constitution of the company is structured to return any profit after costs ( like patents ) to the shareholders BTW ...only to the shareholders and investors who supported that particular project.

Because the assets of the company are valued at $0 there is nothing to sue for and liability is limited to the company ... cant sue the shareholders LOL or the directors ( the subcontractors did the work ) as the company engaged the subcontractors in good faith.... additionally all the knowledge or "Trade Secrets" on how to use the IP is only known to the shareholders/contractors ... the company has no technical staff ... so any aggressors would end up with nothing for their efforts ... particularly because if the company is wound up ...the aggressor would not be at the top of the creditors list.

moodz

[sido]

What ... send it off so they can copy it ??

I have already put a plan in place ...I have legally transferred ownership of my IP to a holding company.....the holding company has placed a value of 0$ on the IP ( as it is not being sold / manufactured etc etc and it is only a cost to them in terms of development , patenting etc etc ) ..however I am subcontracted ( not employed ) by the company to develop and work on ideas which I then transfer to them for no consideration ( as I am contracted by them to develop the ideas ... so they own my output effectively ) ...

However .... I own shares in the company .... if the IP ever does become worth something ( patent, product , licencing etc etc ) ... then I will get a return because I am a voting shareholder and the constitution of the company is structured to return any profit after costs ( like patents ) to the shareholders BTW ...only to the shareholders and investors who supported that particular project.

Because the assets of the company are valued at $0 there is nothing to sue for and liability is limited to the company ... cant sue the shareholders LOL or the directors ( the subcontractors did the work ) as the company engaged the subcontractors in good faith.... additionally all the knowledge or "Trade Secrets" on how to use the IP is only known to the shareholders/contractors ... the company has no technical staff ... so any aggressors would end up with nothing for their efforts ... particularly because if the company is wound up ...the aggressor would not be at the top of the creditors list.

moodz

Well thanks for that info Moodz and good to here your investigating new paths in protecting your IP from future liabilities. I am assuming your IP is in breach of no other.

There are ways to limit yourself to open litigation as seems to be the case here and being told otherwise.

Sid

[Carl-NC]

Carl, by being open, honest and also have taken reasonable steps to avoid IP infringements, you are minimizing the risk of being sued for damages in lost revenue etc....

What your saying is that the current new designs presented here are in breach of somebodys IP in some way and whatever is presented open here is worth ziltch in whatever value is put on it???. Well if that is the case it makes me wonder what this forum is all about after all.

Sid

Being open and honest have no bearing on patent infringement (though it may on damages). "Taking reasonable steps" is relative. If you are on a hobby forum where folks are messing around with circuits for the purpose of learning and maybe developing something for fun, then "reasonable steps" might involve asking the local denizens, "Anyone ever see a transmitter done this way before?"

However, if you decide to go into commercial production, "reasonable steps" takes on a whole different meaning. Better dig deep on patent searches, and employ the advice of an attorney.

On this forum there are concepts and circuits that are both in the public domain and patented. Ferinstance, some people have discussed and even built a dual-field PI coil which has an active patent. For homebrew "messing around" it's highly highly unlikely you will get sued for using anything on this forum.

[chudster]

Sid,

There are ways but they are not cheap. There are numerous legal agreements that need to be tight, company incorporation and fees, and then patent costs on top of that. One company I set up like that cost $20K in legal fees and I was told that was cheap for that complexity of deal! Not to pour cold water on what Moodz has done; but of course there are ways to limit your liability so that you are not personally sued but it may not still see your idea out there.

Chudster

[Aziz]

Hi all,

I like the Moodz's idea of setting up a cheap Ltd. If one Ltd gets "broken", you can easily setup up another one. If someone is going to make a business with (high-end) metal detectors, then do it with a company shell.

Another thing: IP is restricted to a location (not everywhere protected). You might infring an idea on one location (market) but you also may produce and sell it on another not protected location. This is the possibility, to increase the warchest.

Anyway, I don't like the idea that an IP should belong to only one person/organisation. It is only monopolizing the market, prohibiting progress and competition, increasing the product costs, keeping the IP holder to exploit the market instead of making progress, ... and so on..

We the human being always shared our ideas and improved them further. That's the natural way. But the patent system late time has become so ridiculuos, that I do not support it anymore. It's time to share all good ideas. And if someone patents the public domain idea, we can blame him for stealing it (get ready to tar and feather *LOL*).

Aziz

[moodz]

Sid,

There are ways but they are not cheap. There are numerous legal agreements that need to be tight, company incorporation and fees, and then patent costs on top of that. One company I set up like that cost $20K in legal fees and I was told that was cheap for that complexity of deal! Not to pour cold water on what Moodz has done; but of course there are ways to limit your liability so that you are not personally sued but it may not still see your idea out there.

Chudster

.... the CRAP that happened (is happening to BW) is only driving my development harder and faster .... if you ever develop a successful "open" detector .... and by successful I mean a unit which truly outperforms most of the the competition out there ...expect to get sued harder than a "closed" proprietary design ... after all its alot easier to look for patent infringements when you publish the circuit and howtos than it is for a closed design which has to be reverse engineered ...

There is an old saying .... an elephant is a mouse designed by a committee ....

...if you want to beat the system ... use the system against itself ...you cant beat it any other way.

moodz

[Davor]

Or not...

According to Albert Einstein "You can't solve a problem with the same kind of thinking that created it."
Once upon a time the patent system made perfect sense, but right now it serves only the interest of the parasites around it. It may be safely recognised as innovation tax.

Copyright is still largely unadulterated form of innovation recognition, and copyleft even more so. I don't expect anything to happen with respect to improving the patent system any time soon, especially after inclusion of small chunks of computer code as patentable IP, and US Senate watching backs of patent trolls.

Now, there is a category mostly left alone in most of the rants about IP, favoured by copyright laws, loved by politicians, smelling like optimism: education. I guess most of us, trolls excluded, are here for some kind of educational reasons. My strong belief is that keeping our marbles pro-educational we'll be able to play with them indefinitely.

Look at me, I joined here in January this year. I just can't deny that I learned a lot, just by being here.

[Tinkerer]

Or not...

According to Albert Einstein "You can't solve a problem with the same kind of thinking that created it."
Once upon a time the patent system made perfect sense, but right now it serves only the interest of the parasites around it. It may be safely recognised as innovation tax.

Copyright is still largely unadulterated form of innovation recognition, and copyleft even more so. I don't expect anything to happen with respect to improving the patent system any time soon, especially after inclusion of small chunks of computer code as patentable IP, and US Senate watching backs of patent trolls.

Now, there is a category mostly left alone in most of the rants about IP, favoured by copyright laws, loved by politicians, smelling like optimism: education. I guess most of us, trolls excluded, are here for some kind of educational reasons. My strong belief is that keeping our marbles pro-educational we'll be able to play with them indefinitely.

Look at me, I joined here in January this year. I just can't deny that I learned a lot, just by being here.

I like the educational aspect, but together with the learning, we need the means to it. To setup a minimum lab for experimenting, needs a few pieces of equipment. It also needs a kit of parts and it would be good to keep the parts box reasonably updated.

It would be nice to have the hobby pay for itself.

It won't do much good to try to use 741 opamps and 10% tolerance resistors.

One advantage of having an LLC, would be to be able to get samples from the major parts manufacturers. The best, newest components, and it is amazing the things that are available, would be nice to have for designing the best newest metal detector.

Tinkerer