Open Metal Detector Project Charter

[ivconic]

Hi folks,

but such a complex project can't work. You need a small group and have to work in a closed and protected environment (communication via emails).
Aziz

Bad idea, because whole traffic on the internet can be monitored, saved and misused. Same with any other way of digital communications.
Cell phones for example, too.
So if you have brilliant ideas and projects; than nothing is secure and sure except to keep them on "isolated" PC, away from any internet connection or networking.
I keep my works on such isolated system, that's why i have 5 machines at home. Only two are connected.
Also; you can't trust just anybody. Friends and pals from forums are not to be trusted 100%.
Some of those people you can trust but majority you can't.
There are "friends" who will sell you for a dime.
Third; even if those people are real friends; doesn't mean their systems are secure enough too.
There may be "leaks" in their system without they to know and be aware about that at all.
So nothing is secure enough. Industrial espionage is huge business.
For example: Minelab can pay funny money to some skilled hacker to infiltrate here and sniff out complete communication, emails too.
Not to mention various p2p and messengers, social networks and similar.
So, smart is to shut up and say nothing indeed important in public. Keep you works on isolated system.
If you must correspond to other people via network, than try to encrypt your data before sending it.
There are ways and methods.
Cheers!

[andyt]

Very interesting to read. I design products for companies independently.

I think one thing to bear in mind is that companies operate to make money and to maintain their own legal status in good order. They need to have a commercial reason to take someone to court, otherwise there is no point.

So why would a company take someone or another company to court?
1) They are competitive and by taking competitors and new startup companies to court they limit competition. It costs money to defend, the bigger you are the more money you have to do it...so you may want to crush startups before they have a chance of generating revenue to defend. To most engineers this is not what they went into engineering for, but it is the way many companies operate. Lets face it, once your core patents have expired your next legal line of defense is to use supplementary patents to stop the growth of startups and competitors.
2) Patent trolls, they will wait for companies to reach revenue then hit them and hope they will pay up. They are not interested in crushing companies, they want money from them. Unfortunately they also push many patents that should not have been issued and as a small company you cannot afford to go to court...so you are blackmailed. (They may of course want to put you out of business if they have a big key exclusive licensee royalty to protect)
3) If a "company A" licenses its IP to another "company B", the company licensing has a responsibility to police who uses the IP. If you have a great patent, you sell it to a "company B" for $500k, then you do nothing to stop "company C" from using it for free, then "company B" paid for competitive advantage and is not getting it. "Company B" may then want to take "Company A" to court to get their $500k back.

Now looking at the hobbiest, most companies will not worry too much about someone making a detector at home. But lets say you own the patent on a coil design, you license that design for a royalty to another company who makes coils for you. Now hobbiests start making and selling those coils? If you dont defend your patent rights against the hobbiests then the company who paid you for your coil design license could rightly feel upset. They thought they were buying exclusive rights...now they have competitors who dont even have to pay royalties. So a company may feel they need to defend their legal position by taking hobbiests to court if they are selling even small numbers of products that are competing with the rightful licensee.

I have no idea what the case is referred to in this thread so these comments are generalisations.

Ideally patents would be written in a clear way so that you could hold up the patents that have expired and the ones that havn't and know what is infringing or not. I had a quick look through some of the patents on this site, and it would be easy to conclude that discrimination was invented twenty times and received a patent 20 times.

The sad thing is that almost no small/startup company from USA or Europe would deliberately infringe a patent if the claims were clear. They want to create something new and make some money, they dont want to play legal punch and judy. But I have met many people in business who feel that you are stupid if you have legal muscle and dont use it to limit competition in any way possible.

I cannot see how any group of people have a hope of avoiding being taken to court (and surviving without significant legal backing) if they result in product pushed into the market that may infringe, unless they work very hard to ensure they do not in any way clash with these cryptic patents. In fact you would be making a single core target to take to court, which is easier for the lawyers...they dont want to take lots of single people to court, a collective...great.

I can see that such a group could attempt to identify what IP is now patent expired, and what the patents currently enforced cover. Along with potentially applying for new group patents for group inventions, or just providing publication of ideas so that a patent application could in future be invalidated by pre-publication. Though the latter would not stop you being taken to court either....just give you a defense!

[chudster]

This is getting closer to a solution. We need an ecosystem, with rules for the development and it must motivate the participants.

Chudster

OK. There has been chatter on this thread.

Time for action.

I plan to call a hobbyists conference call via skype in the near future. The topic will be how we can set up an ecosystem to collaborate better and produce outcomes. We will of course be using a forum as a coordinating part of that strategy.

If you want to be invited to the call and as a screener please PM me addressing the following criteria within the next week:

1) Are you a metal detector company hater?
2) Are you affiliated with a metal detector company by relationship, employment or any commercial tie?
3) Why would you like to be involved in hobbyist a development 'collective' and what do you expect out of it?
4) What is your real name, location and time constraints (in your local time) in terms of a conference call?
5) What specific skills do you think you can bring to a group and give a little background on yourself.
6) Would you be happy for me to share your answers with members who are on the call?
7) Anything else you would like to share on the topic?
Do you have skype or need help to set it up?

Other than as you may answer 6, any information will be confidential.

There are a lot of folks out there and I intend to limit it to a core of six or so.

If you do not end up being on the call then don't worry, it is not the intention to exclude people in future (that includes MD company people) but we want to get like minded people together to get the ball rolling.

Chudster

[Mechanic]

Everyone had their pet ideas they wanted to explore and the whole thing never came together as a cohesive effort.
- Carl

Hi Guys,

This is what I would see as the biggest problem with a collaborative project, different people in different Geo-locations with different needs and different or little understanding of the "problem" due to not having experienced the "problem" . Though I do like the idea of a fully digital PI that basically has a transmitter, preamp, 24 bit adc's(Multiple is better for taking more samples/cycle) and a very capable dsp.

Cheers Mick

[Aziz]

Hi folks,

but such a complex project can't work. You need a small group and have to work in a closed and protected environment (communication via emails).
Aziz

[ivconic]

Minelab did that!?
No sympathies for Minelab any more!!
Minelab is history, fading to oblivion!
We enthusiasts and hobbyists can do something about that:
spread the word, do anti campaign and prevent people to waste money on their overpriced yet pretty average detectors.
War on Minelab, from now on!
...
XP rules!
XP is No1!

[chudster]

Possibly another option is to set up a framework where you establish an "ecosystem" that benefits the participants .... where the participants can be hobbyists or commercial enterprises. There would be some sort of point system ... similiar to ebay or frequent flyers where participants can either offer or accept "rewards" or "incentives" ... based on the generation of ideas, tasks performed ( eg testing ) or anything that assists the other members in some way.

so for instance if someone comes up with a good idea they can either put it out for the other participants to see or they can offer it privately to one or more of the participants. Then there is a voting system which allocates votes or "points" to that idea. For a public idea each member can only vote -1 ( bad or already done ) 0 ( neutral or no vote) or +1 ( good idea ).

If the idea is offered privately then the reciever can offer as many points as he/she/they want to however those points equate to redeemable benefits ..... which could be anything ...eg money, parts, test equipment, product etc.

For instance some of these fancy ADCs and take a fair bit of effort and cost to source so if there was a "group buy" or "bulk buy" then there could be considerable savings for group members.

Similiarly commercials could offer parts or test equipment or even financial assistance for "testing / experimentation " in return for ideas, investigations etc etc.

Basically some sort of barter system for things that people need or can provide. Hobbyists need parts etc ( and maybe some code written now and then ) ... commercials have market power for buying things but maybe not so many sources of fresh ideas or thinking outside the box for example.

moodz

This is getting closer to a solution. We need an ecosystem, with rules for the development and it must motivate the participants.

Chudster

[Carl-NC]

These assumptions can be broken and the system could work for the hobbyist ..... with the right playground setup. I believe patents could be won and defended spending very little indeed....... with low hobbyist risk.

I'd have to be convinced.

Hopefully there are enough folks with compatible motivation to form something or else we can just stay fragmented in our efforts and fearful that if a project starts to have success, then without the plan to take it forward, we have the possibility to get dragged into court and stopped when someone picks up the idea and gets too enthusiastic to take it to market.

As I've said, the downfall of the QED wasn't the QED, it was the proponents of the QED. Post #76, Item #7.

[chudster]

The retail metal detector manufactures around the world are a cartel and they won't let you in.......Period !!!

And they just luv metal detecting forums where people bounce around and share ideas with one another,as Carl says if you wanna join in with the big boys you better have lots of spundoullies behind you because if you have a better product than them then there gonna stomp on you.
And if you have capital then best you stay away because they can tie you up with litigation costs like you never imagined and do it for years

Zed

Zed, I can see you are in Oz. The detector market is definitely fragmented and there is plenty of competitive action unlike our petrol and grocery markets (Oh wait don't Coles and Woolies sell petrol too?). I don't think cartel is the right word to describe it.

You have some assumptions. At the risk of being cryptic.

If you can't beat em- then ........

Chudster

[chudster]

Oh, I agree that patents are useful in general, but for a hobbyist or even a hobbyist-collaboration they are probably more of a distraction. In the US a DIY patent approach is around $5k, using a patent attorney around $10-15k. That gets you a patent 3 years later (that's how long it's taking now), which only gives you the right to sue an infringer, which is going to run about $100k. Better hope you used a patent attorney, and he knew what he was doing.

If I told you to go down the the park to play for an hour you might assume you would be bored until you got there and saw a bright shiny new swingset that you were not aware of.

These assumptions can be broken and the system could work for the hobbyist ..... with the right playground setup. I believe patents could be won and defended spending very little indeed....... with low hobbyist risk.

Some years ago I tried a private "Commercial Design Group" on these forums, where members who had obvious experience were invited to join. The intent was to define one or more specific designs, divvy it up, and hopefully end up with a cutting edge detector. Then decide whether to self-produce it or license/sell it. This was before I joined White's.

There were (at least) two problems with the effort. First, there was never a clear leader. I suppose I was, by default, but my time was limited and it was easy to get behind and lose track of what everyone was trying to do. Second, we never really nailed down specific end goals. Everyone had their pet ideas they wanted to explore and the whole thing never came together as a cohesive effort. Also, despite a private forum, people were still reluctant to fully open up and share ideas.

As an Engineering Manager, it's hard enough to manage people and projects that are all within 100 feet of me. Trying to manage part-time participants on the Internet with no almost no authority is a real challenge. I'm impressed with the success of GNU projects.

I'm certainly willing to start up a new private development group again if someone wants to head it up. I cannot; besides time constraints it would be a conflict of interest. But expect an uphill battle just to get it moving in the right direction.

- Carl

I understand the challenge you talk about. As a manager though, its disquieting though that the DEC alpha chip was developed to have breakthrough performance without any formal management or project approval and funding from DEC. In fact they did it to prove management wrong. It is amazing what a rabble might do if motivated.

Hopefully there are enough folks with compatible motivation to form something or else we can just stay fragmented in our efforts and fearful that if a project starts to have success, then without the plan to take it forward, we have the possibility to get dragged into court and stopped when someone picks up the idea and gets too enthusiastic to take it to market.

Chudster

[Carl-NC]

It is a good post and your points are relevant to the 'charter'. I think we are on the same page probably with everything except about the patents as I think there is a role and a useful strategy there for them.

Oh, I agree that patents are useful in general, but for a hobbyist or even a hobbyist-collaboration they are probably more of a distraction. In the US a DIY patent approach is around $5k, using a patent attorney around $10-15k. That gets you a patent 3 years later (that's how long it's taking now), which only gives you the right to sue an infringer, which is going to run about $100k. Better hope you used a patent attorney, and he knew what he was doing.

The main point is we need something that pools the efforts of hobbyists and supports collaboration. The current environment is fragmenting them and preventing the sharing of information.

Chudster

Some years ago I tried a private "Commercial Design Group" on these forums, where members who had obvious experience were invited to join. The intent was to define one or more specific designs, divvy it up, and hopefully end up with a cutting edge detector. Then decide whether to self-produce it or license/sell it. This was before I joined White's.

There were (at least) two problems with the effort. First, there was never a clear leader. I suppose I was, by default, but my time was limited and it was easy to get behind and lose track of what everyone was trying to do. Second, we never really nailed down specific end goals. Everyone had their pet ideas they wanted to explore and the whole thing never came together as a cohesive effort. Also, despite a private forum, people were still reluctant to fully open up and share ideas.

As an Engineering Manager, it's hard enough to manage people and projects that are all within 100 feet of me. Trying to manage part-time participants on the Internet with no almost no authority is a real challenge. I'm impressed with the success of GNU projects.

I'm certainly willing to start up a new private development group again if someone wants to head it up. I cannot; besides time constraints it would be a conflict of interest. But expect an uphill battle just to get it moving in the right direction.

- Carl

[moodz]

Possibly another option is to set up a framework where you establish an "ecosystem" that benefits the participants .... where the participants can be hobbyists or commercial enterprises. There would be some sort of point system ... similiar to ebay or frequent flyers where participants can either offer or accept "rewards" or "incentives" ... based on the generation of ideas, tasks performed ( eg testing ) or anything that assists the other members in some way.

so for instance if someone comes up with a good idea they can either put it out for the other participants to see or they can offer it privately to one or more of the participants. Then there is a voting system which allocates votes or "points" to that idea. For a public idea each member can only vote -1 ( bad or already done ) 0 ( neutral or no vote) or +1 ( good idea ).

If the idea is offered privately then the reciever can offer as many points as he/she/they want to however those points equate to redeemable benefits ..... which could be anything ...eg money, parts, test equipment, product etc.

For instance some of these fancy ADCs and take a fair bit of effort and cost to source so if there was a "group buy" or "bulk buy" then there could be considerable savings for group members.

Similiarly commercials could offer parts or test equipment or even financial assistance for "testing / experimentation " in return for ideas, investigations etc etc.

Basically some sort of barter system for things that people need or can provide. Hobbyists need parts etc ( and maybe some code written now and then ) ... commercials have market power for buying things but maybe not so many sources of fresh ideas or thinking outside the box for example.

moodz

[Carl-NC]

The retail metal detector manufactures around the world are a cartel and they won't let you in.......Period !!!

And they just luv metal detecting forums where people bounce around and share ideas with one another,as Carl says if you wanna join in with the big boys you better have lots of spundoullies behind you because if you have a better product than them then there gonna stomp on you.
And if you have capital then best you stay away because they can tie you up with litigation costs like you never imagined and do it for years

Zed

Well, this isn't true in the least. There is no cartel, no collusion, not even cooperation. Sounds like a Doug Conspiracy. How could XP or Blisstool or Nexus or Red Heat or half a dozen PI makers have arisen with this powerful cartel to crush them? No, the problem with the QED, and the resulting sledgehammer response, is all on the behavior of the people involved. They got what they were begging for, and they're surprised? Really?

- Carl

[chudster]

Hi chudster, I think, problem pointed here, can be solved this way:

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/legalcode

one of different known examples:

http://www.arduino.cc/

Yes that could be part of the mix. The arduino is more relevant as it has hardware but we have to recognise that there is more to this story as the arduino doesn't live in a patent aggressive environment.

Chudster

[chudster]

http://www.geotech1.com/forums/showthread.php?19376-QED&p=152608#post152608

All this assumes that you want to get something for your efforts, which is actually the first thing you need to decide. Do you want something (namely money) out of it, or do you just want to have fun? The money route is by far the more difficult one (it ties your hands) and the one more likely to attract "attention." But if you do it just for funsies and you come up with a really novel idea, then don't be surprised if that idea shows up in a major company's product with no gratitude.

- Carl

It is a good post and your points are relevant to the 'charter'. I think we are on the same page probably with everything except about the patents as I think there is a role and a useful strategy there for them.

The main point is we need something that pools the efforts of hobbyists and supports collaboration. The current environment is fragmenting them and preventing the sharing of information.

Chudster