Open Metal Detector Project Charter

[chudster]

Not knowing the details of the QED/Minelab situation, my first reaction is that Minelab is being overly aggressive. I honestly don't know why they've chosen to go after Bugs, but after more than 3 years of kicking and spitting on the dog it doesn't surprise me that the dog done bit 'im.

I don't know what you mean by "charter." Are you wanting Minelab to agree up front to allow people to independently develop detectors? Unless you have a written agreement with them, there isn't much that will specifically protect you.

It is true that anyone can take you to court claiming anything. Reading about your brush with TX courts in 2003 is testament to that. One of the factors in BW's case was the behaviour of others, posting, comments and behaviour. Another factor is likely to be the innovation patent that was filed which may have elements suggestive of minelab patents.

A commercial company would be unlikely to be a party but that could be accommodated. A charter would be pleaded to an 'attacking company' to leave the hobbyist alone and pursue others if they have a grievance and could be pleaded to the court for the same purpose if they persisted. It would have a legal basis in the exemptions afforded by patent legislation. The charter would need to be agreed to by all project members as a condition to being privy to project IP before open publication and have a mechanism and process to publish and patent if appropriate.

Many of the world's communication standards were developed under such a collaborative framework between commercial and academic interests and patent rights were dealt with in those.

Patents are a rich man's game. It's $5,000 just to sit down at the table, and $100,000 to play. If you don't have $100,000 and nerves of steel then don't bother showing up.

I disagree that patenting has to be a rich man's game for hobbyists but I am not going to discuss possible strategies openly and how that might be funded for the industry to start to pick apart. It is however a STRATEGIC game.

You don't need to do anything special to develop independent detector circuits. Stay off other people's patents, especially if those people have a history of aggressive enforcement. If you don't understand what the patents say, start a discussion on it and let's figure it out! If you believe a patent is a rehash of prior art and that you can legally infringe it, read the line above about having $100,000 and nerves of steel.

And that is part of the problem. Its fine to take patented strategies and improve them for the purpose of advancing the art experimentally. With development by many people and many many patents out there you at least need some sort of process to vet what might be released for 'final use' or you need to disclaim that the stuff is for such final use or never have any useful output outside experimentation. That is what a project charter would make clear. A good patent attorney for a determined company could take openly published info and make a case for infringement so that must be foreseen. It is not like a black box competing product that must be reverse engineered to determine infringement. The soul of the 'product' is laid bare.

Previously I posted some suggestions on how to develop an independent detector:

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

Will read this and analyse.

My current question. Is there a core group that is interested in forming such a project and who should they be?

Chudster

[ZED]

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

[Carl-NC]

Not knowing the details of the QED/Minelab situation, my first reaction is that Minelab is being overly aggressive. I honestly don't know why they've chosen to go after Bugs, but after more than 3 years of kicking and spitting on the dog it doesn't surprise me that the dog done bit 'im.

I don't know what you mean by "charter." Are you wanting Minelab to agree up front to allow people to independently develop detectors? Unless you have a written agreement with them, there isn't much that will specifically protect you.

Patents are a rich man's game. It's $5,000 just to sit down at the table, and $100,000 to play. If you don't have $100,000 and nerves of steel then don't bother showing up.

You don't need to do anything special to develop independent detector circuits. Stay off other people's patents, especially if those people have a history of aggressive enforcement. If you don't understand what the patents say, start a discussion on it and let's figure it out! If you believe a patent is a rehash of prior art and that you can legally infringe it, read the line above about having $100,000 and nerves of steel.

Previously I posted some suggestions on how to develop an independent detector:

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

[WM6]

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/

[Davor]

Don Lancaster is on such crusade for years now, you can check it at www.tinaja.com

[Aziz]

Hello, published information cannot be patented. Once you let the idea out, it becomes the state of the art and no one can patent it.

This rule doesn't apply to patent trolls!!
*LOL*

[pelanj]

Hello, published information cannot be patented. Once you let the idea out, it becomes the state of the art and no one can patent it.

[chudster]

Recently some hobbyists have been taken to court by Minelab for potential patent infringement.

Some interpret Minelab's behaviour as anticompetitive and unconscionable.

Some interpret the hobbyist's behaviour as inviting trouble.

Nonetheless there are lessons to be learned.

I am opening this thread looking for feedback to form a charter for projects to prevent this happening again. In particular how do we make it happen in a way that protects folks from legal threat?

Do we collect patents in some kind of entity or publish to protect? If hobbyists patent, how are these paid for when the big patent costs start? Do we form a non-profit company that licences out its patents but prevents other companies from using its IP without cross licencing their patents? If we publish, how do we stop companies from picking up embryonic ideas once disclosed, improving on them and patenting those improvements? Do we want to stop them?

Can we just do it through a simple charter?

How do we foster innovation through collaboration via forums internationally to push detector technology to the max?

Over to you ........