[OT] Disassembler recommendations?

[Tim_Roberts]

Don Burn wrote:

I will admit some software patents have been abused, this happens in all
types of patents (my father was a patent lawyer), and I will be the first to
admit that the patent office could do better. But, making broad statements
about patents or the lawyers is not helping.

Well, then let me be specific. My partners (who hold 5 patents between
them) and I have made a mildly successful side business of reviewing
patent portfolios, and acting as consulting experts during litigation.
Over the past decade, we have read many thousands of patents (and killed
quite a number of trees). In all those thousands of patents, we have
encountered less than a dozen where we said to ourselves, “now this was
a really new idea”.

You say “some software patents have been abused”; I would say “most
software patents have been abused”. Patents have grown away from being
a method to reward and encourage innovation, and have become a weapon to
be wielded in a corporate cold war. As long as two companies are
allies, all is smiles. When they get ticked off, they launch volleys of
trivial patents at each other, hoping they can make one of them stick.
That’s just not what the framers of the constitution had in mind when
they allowed for the establishment of a patent office.

I’m not sure what the right solution is. We certainly need a mechanism
to allow Joe Atom-smasher to present his ideas to Acme, Inc., with some
knowledge that his idea won’t be stolen immediately after the
presentation, but when teams of lawyers spend millions agonizing over
ways to twist the wording of 15-year-old patents to apply to ideas that
are only marginally related, in an attempt to extort money from their
successful rivals, that’s not productive for society in general.

–
Tim Roberts, xxxxx@probo.com
Providenza & Boekelheide, Inc.

[Gary_Little-2]

Gotta agree with you Tim. My puny little one patent was gobbled up by m=
y
employer at the time, Symbol Technology, not to be used, but tocontrol =
and
stifle if needed. And I never did get all the $1000 I was promised.JThe=
y
laid me off before the patent was granted and I received the final $500=
.

Gary G. Little

---

From: xxxxx@lists.osr.com [
mailto:xxxxx@lists.osr.com] On Behalf xxxxx@probo.com
Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2006 11:19 AM
To: Windows System Software Devs Interest List
Subject: Re: [ntdev] Re:[OT] Disassembler recommendations?

Don Burn wrote:

I will admit some software patents have been abused, this happens in a=
ll

types of patents (my father was a patent lawyer), and I will be the fi=
rst
to

admit that the patent office could do better.=A0 But, making broad sta=

tements

about patents or the lawyers is not helping.

Well, then let me be specific.=A0 My partners (who hold 5 patents betwe=
en

them) and I have made a mildly successful side business of reviewing

patent portfolios, and acting as consulting experts during litigation.

Over the past decade, we have read many thousands of patents (and kille=
d

quite a number of trees).=A0 In all those thousands of patents, we have=

encountered less than a dozen where we said to ourselves, "now this was=

a really new idea".

You say “some software patents have been abused”; I would say "most

software patents have been abused".=A0 Patents have grown away from bei=
ng

a method to reward and encourage innovation, and have become a weapon t=
o

be wielded in a corporate cold war.=A0 As long as two companies are

allies, all is smiles.=A0 When they get ticked off, they launch volleys=
of

trivial patents at each other, hoping they can make one of them stick.

That’s just not what the framers of the constitution had in mind when

they allowed for the establishment of a patent office.

I’m not sure what the right solution is.=A0 We certainly need a mechani=
sm

to allow Joe Atom-smasher to present his ideas to Acme, Inc., with some=

knowledge that his idea won’t be stolen immediately after the

presentation, but when teams of lawyers spend millions agonizing over

ways to twist the wording of 15-year-old patents to apply to ideas that=

are only marginally related, in an attempt to extort money from their

successful rivals, that’s not productive for society in general.

–

Tim Roberts, xxxxx@probo.com

Providenza & Boekelheide, Inc.

---

Questions? First check the Kernel Driver FAQ at
http://www.osronline.com/article.cfm?id=3D256

You are currently subscribed to ntdev as: xxxxx@seagate.com

To unsubscribe send a blank email to xxxxx@lists.osr.com=

[David_J_Craig]

You are paid to come to work and create something for a company. They
patent it, or have you do the writing of the patent, but they pay the patent
fees. You should get to keep it? If you work on the assembly line does
that mean you should get to keep all you assemble? I doubt it. Most
employers have you sign an employee agreement that all ‘inventions’ you
develop in the course of your work belong to the company. Some make it very
broad so that even something you develop at home is theirs, but that is
probably unenforceable unless it relates to your employment. If you write
code and design a better mousetrap, I would agree your company should not
have the rights to it. Regardless of your type of job, if you are being
paid a salary or hourly wages, your output should belong to the company. It
is a trade made with both knowing the rules.

“Alberto Moreira” wrote in message news:xxxxx@ntdev…
> Hey, Bill,
>
> The whole of Linux has been built on the idea of free software, and it has
> benefited a lot of people. Also, patents rarely benefit the creator except
> very indirectly as a brownie point in one’s resume’. If patents were
> untransferable and belonged to the creator and not to the corporation, it
> would be a fair concept; as it is, it’s an aberration. I also like you,
> Bill, but personally, I will pass.
>
> Alberto.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: “Bill McKenzie”
> Newsgroups: ntdev
> To: “Windows System Software Devs Interest List”
> Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2006 8:02 PM
> Subject: Re:[ntdev] Re:[OT] Disassembler recommendations?
>
>
>> Software patents seem somewhat specious to me, but then again I don’t
>> have any My take is that the patent lawyers don’t have the tools to
>> handle software patents very well.
>>
>> At my last company I saw a guy get a patent for technology that was a.)
>> blatently obvious, b.) already being used (the EXACT technology) in
>> shipping products for over 8 years, and finally c.) covered in almost
>> identical language in a pre-existing patent. I would say that that
>> patent is about as useful as a roll of Charmin, and I would not hesitate
>> to use the technology from that patent in a product for one second.
>>
>> Also, it seems the precedent in software has gone against patents for the
>> most part.
>>
>> All of that said:
>>
>>>Meanwhile, I believe it’s our common interest to patent the least
>>>possible, and to make as much code as we possibly can publicly available
>>>for the benefit of the whole kernel dev community.
>>
>> I could not disagree with you more. Giving out free software (primarily
>> with source), aside from simple starter examples and/or brief technology
>> demonstrations, is about as intelligent a move for a developer as
>> building you a free house. I like you Alberto, but personally, I will
>> pass.
>>
>> Bill M.
>>
>> “Alberto Moreira” wrote in message
>> news:xxxxx@ntdev…
>>> You know, I don’t know much patented real stuff - as opposed to obvious
>>> stuff - that hasn’t been covered by some paper in some journal, and I am
>>> of the opinion that a pretty large amount of patents out there fall in
>>> the category I would call “obvious”, and hence they shouldn’t have been
>>> granted to begin with. But that’s just an opinion. As I see it, nothing
>>> should be patentable unless it passed a strict peer review of forefront
>>> researchers: if a top quality academic journal wouldn’t publish it, it
>>> shouldn’t deserve to be patented!
>>>
>>> And then, again, the half-life of patented stuff is jolly short. Much of
>>> the value of a patent, as I see it, is a brownie point jotted down
>>> against the psychological value of a company; they may be pretty nice
>>> for bean counters, but those of us on the front line of research and
>>> development shouldn’t need to sweat because of patents. Just do it
>>> differently, or go find that paper in that journal, which preempts the
>>> patent to begin with, and use it. And you know what ? Chances are that
>>> by the time you get your development done, the patent is obsolete
>>> anyway.
>>>
>>> Meanwhile, I believe it’s our common interest to patent the least
>>> possible, and to make as much code as we possibly can publicly available
>>> for the benefit of the whole kernel dev community.
>>>
>>>
>>> Alberto.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: “Don Burn”
>>> Newsgroups: ntdev
>>> To: “Windows System Software Devs Interest List”
>>> Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006 11:53 AM
>>> Subject: Re:[ntdev] [OT] Disassembler recommendations?
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> “Oliver Schneider” wrote in message
>>>> news:xxxxx@ntdev…
>>>>> That’s why we Europeans don’t like (pure) software patents :o) … it
>>>>> only
>>>>> benefits those really big companies that already have a truck-load of
>>>>> patent
>>>>> applications around the corner of the EU patent office.
>>>>>
>>>> I’m sure that OSR who has applied for a software patent appreciates the
>>>> “really big company” moniker, I know I and my partner do as we apply
>>>> for our third patent (now if we only had some big firm money).
>>>>
>>>> The contention that software patents are all covered by academic
>>>> research is bullshit. If so then obviously all Computer Science PHD
>>>> programs should shut down, since there is nothing new to invent or
>>>> research for a students doctorate!
>>>>
>>>> I remember explaining my first software patent to a couple university
>>>> professors, one got excited thinking is was great. The other said it
>>>> was obvious and there should be no patent. So I started asking him
>>>> where it was obvious or prior art. Well the prior art was pretty far
>>>> afield of the way the patent did it, so we moved on to the obvious
>>>> comment, at which point he explained that no he had never heard of this
>>>> but “once you have explained how to do it, it is obvious!”. If patents
>>>> needed to clear this bar, there would be few useful inventions.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> –
>>>> Don Burn (MVP, Windows DDK)
>>>> Windows 2k/XP/2k3 Filesystem and Driver Consulting
>>>> Remove StopSpam from the email to reply
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> —
>>>> Questions? First check the Kernel Driver FAQ at
>>>> http://www.osronline.com/article.cfm?id=256
>>>>
>>>> You are currently subscribed to ntdev as: xxxxx@ieee.org
>>>> To unsubscribe send a blank email to xxxxx@lists.osr.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> —
>> Questions? First check the Kernel Driver FAQ at
>> http://www.osronline.com/article.cfm?id=256
>>
>> You are currently subscribed to ntdev as: xxxxx@ieee.org
>> To unsubscribe send a blank email to xxxxx@lists.osr.com
>
>
>

[Ray_Trent]

Alberto Moreira wrote:

except very indirectly as a brownie point in one’s resume’. If patents
were untransferable and belonged to the creator and not to the
corporation, it would be a fair concept; as it is, it’s an aberration. I

I’ve heard people suggest this a couple of times, but it wouldn’t make
any difference. In order for their to be a point to having a patent at
all, surely you’d at least have to be able to license it to a
corporation, and if you can do that, they can just as easily attach a
clause granting them a permanent, exclusive, transferable license to
your patent in their employment contract as they do with the actual
patents now.

Ray

[Tim_Roberts]

David J. Craig wrote:

You are paid to come to work and create something for a company. They
patent it, or have you do the writing of the patent, but they pay the patent
fees. You should get to keep it? If you work on the assembly line does
that mean you should get to keep all you assemble? I doubt it. …
Regardless of your type of job, if you are being
paid a salary or hourly wages, your output should belong to the company. It
is a trade made with both knowing the rules.

You make a good point, but the other point of view is not without
merit. An “idea” is fundamentally different from the production of an
assembly line. It isn’t necessarily obvious that ownership of my idea
should remain with a company when I leave.

Of course, it’s impossible to judge whether I would have had the idea if
my employer had not been providing tools and paying me to work in the
field, or if I had not been surrounded by people doing related work.

It’s a complicated situation.

–
Tim Roberts, xxxxx@probo.com
Providenza & Boekelheide, Inc.

[David_J_Craig]

Interesting idea, but I think that an ‘idea’ I am paid to have, belongs to
those paying me. If I don’t want to have those rules controlling my ideas,
I don’t have to take the job. I cannot place some alturistic ‘value’ to my
work in ideas above the work of those who do manual labor. We are both paid
according to the value of our work to those paying us - with legal
considerations being considered. Professional sports players are mostly
paid for manual labor and while I may think they are overpaid, I sure
couldn’t, at any point in my life, perform at their level. With the change
in physical fitness of many in the US, aren’t professional class atheletes
harder to find than an ‘idea’ person?

“Tim Roberts” wrote in message news:xxxxx@ntdev…
> David J. Craig wrote:
>
>>You are paid to come to work and create something for a company. They
>>patent it, or have you do the writing of the patent, but they pay the
>>patent
>>fees. You should get to keep it? If you work on the assembly line does
>>that mean you should get to keep all you assemble? I doubt it. …
>>Regardless of your type of job, if you are being
>>paid a salary or hourly wages, your output should belong to the company.
>>It
>>is a trade made with both knowing the rules.
>>
>>
>
> You make a good point, but the other point of view is not without
> merit. An “idea” is fundamentally different from the production of an
> assembly line. It isn’t necessarily obvious that ownership of my idea
> should remain with a company when I leave.
>
> Of course, it’s impossible to judge whether I would have had the idea if
> my employer had not been providing tools and paying me to work in the
> field, or if I had not been surrounded by people doing related work.
>
> It’s a complicated situation.
>
> –
> Tim Roberts, xxxxx@probo.com
> Providenza & Boekelheide, Inc.
>
>
>

[OSR_Community_User]

Hello David,

I don’t think there is an issue regarding idea’s that we have on company time.

However, if you have an idea while lying in bed at night or in the shower, does the company own it? They weren’t paying you during that time.

If a mechanic fixes a friend’s car at home during the evening does his primary employer get the proceeds?

Of course, it can get really messy if someone is moonlighting Say you have multiple contracts with different employers and you have an idea on your own time that crosses over. Who owns the idea?

I’m not saying you are wrong overall, just that the manual labor analogy is incorrect. In a legal sense, we are NOT treated as well as a manual laborer.

We do not necessarily own an idea we have on our own time. The only issue regards to what degree. Usually ideas unrelated to your employment are our own but all other ideas are the company’s. You could say that the employer owns your mind in some restricted sense.

Derek

“David J. Craig” wrote: Interesting idea, but I think that an ‘idea’ I am paid to have, belongs to
those paying me. If I don’t want to have those rules controlling my ideas,
I don’t have to take the job. I cannot place some alturistic ‘value’ to my
work in ideas above the work of those who do manual labor. We are both paid
according to the value of our work to those paying us - with legal
considerations being considered. Professional sports players are mostly
paid for manual labor and while I may think they are overpaid, I sure
couldn’t, at any point in my life, perform at their level. With the change
in physical fitness of many in the US, aren’t professional class atheletes
harder to find than an ‘idea’ person?

“Tim Roberts” wrote in message news:xxxxx@ntdev…
> David J. Craig wrote:
>
>>You are paid to come to work and create something for a company. They
>>patent it, or have you do the writing of the patent, but they pay the
>>patent
>>fees. You should get to keep it? If you work on the assembly line does
>>that mean you should get to keep all you assemble? I doubt it. …
>>Regardless of your type of job, if you are being
>>paid a salary or hourly wages, your output should belong to the company.
>>It
>>is a trade made with both knowing the rules.
>>
>>
>
> You make a good point, but the other point of view is not without
> merit. An “idea” is fundamentally different from the production of an
> assembly line. It isn’t necessarily obvious that ownership of my idea
> should remain with a company when I leave.
>
> Of course, it’s impossible to judge whether I would have had the idea if
> my employer had not been providing tools and paying me to work in the
> field, or if I had not been surrounded by people doing related work.
>
> It’s a complicated situation.
>
> –
> Tim Roberts, xxxxx@probo.com
> Providenza & Boekelheide, Inc.
>
>
>

—
Questions? First check the Kernel Driver FAQ at http://www.osronline.com/article.cfm?id=256

You are currently subscribed to ntdev as: xxxxx@yahoo.com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to xxxxx@lists.osr.com

---------------------------------
Yahoo! Photos
Ring in the New Year with Photo Calendars. Add photos, events, holidays, whatever.

[David_J_Craig]

That is what they pay you to do. You pay for manual labor, including some
thinking about how to accomplish the task, and I still don’t see the big
difference. As someone else mentioned, if you have an idea about something
doing with work when you are not at work, would you have had that idea had
you not been involved in that job? Having served in the military, I guess
my view is that my employer gets my related ideas regardless of when I came
up with them. When I want to have ideas that are mine, I can go back to
independent contractor or start my own company. Someone has to ‘pay’ for
the ideas, even if it is you by not having the dependability of a fixed
income to rely on while you bring an idea to life.

“Derek Dickinson” wrote in message
news:xxxxx@ntdev…
> Hello David,
>
> I don’t think there is an issue regarding idea’s that we have on company
> time.
>
> However, if you have an idea while lying in bed at night or in the
> shower, does the company own it? They weren’t paying you during that
> time.
>
> If a mechanic fixes a friend’s car at home during the evening does his
> primary employer get the proceeds?
>
> Of course, it can get really messy if someone is moonlighting Say
> you have multiple contracts with different employers and you have an idea
> on your own time that crosses over. Who owns the idea?
>
> I’m not saying you are wrong overall, just that the manual labor analogy
> is incorrect. In a legal sense, we are NOT treated as well as a manual
> laborer.
>
> We do not necessarily own an idea we have on our own time. The only
> issue regards to what degree. Usually ideas unrelated to your employment
> are our own but all other ideas are the company’s. You could say that
> the employer owns your mind in some restricted sense.
>
> Derek
>
> “David J. Craig” wrote: Interesting idea, but I
> think that an ‘idea’ I am paid to have, belongs to
> those paying me. If I don’t want to have those rules controlling my
> ideas,
> I don’t have to take the job. I cannot place some alturistic ‘value’ to
> my
> work in ideas above the work of those who do manual labor. We are both
> paid
> according to the value of our work to those paying us - with legal
> considerations being considered. Professional sports players are mostly
> paid for manual labor and while I may think they are overpaid, I sure
> couldn’t, at any point in my life, perform at their level. With the
> change
> in physical fitness of many in the US, aren’t professional class atheletes
> harder to find than an ‘idea’ person?
>
> “Tim Roberts” wrote in message news:xxxxx@ntdev…
>> David J. Craig wrote:
>>
>>>You are paid to come to work and create something for a company. They
>>>patent it, or have you do the writing of the patent, but they pay the
>>>patent
>>>fees. You should get to keep it? If you work on the assembly line does
>>>that mean you should get to keep all you assemble? I doubt it. …
>>>Regardless of your type of job, if you are being
>>>paid a salary or hourly wages, your output should belong to the company.
>>>It
>>>is a trade made with both knowing the rules.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> You make a good point, but the other point of view is not without
>> merit. An “idea” is fundamentally different from the production of an
>> assembly line. It isn’t necessarily obvious that ownership of my idea
>> should remain with a company when I leave.
>>
>> Of course, it’s impossible to judge whether I would have had the idea if
>> my employer had not been providing tools and paying me to work in the
>> field, or if I had not been surrounded by people doing related work.
>>
>> It’s a complicated situation.
>>
>> –
>> Tim Roberts, xxxxx@probo.com
>> Providenza & Boekelheide, Inc.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> —
> Questions? First check the Kernel Driver FAQ at
> http://www.osronline.com/article.cfm?id=256
>
> You are currently subscribed to ntdev as: xxxxx@yahoo.com
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to xxxxx@lists.osr.com
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Yahoo! Photos
> Ring in the New Year with Photo Calendars. Add photos, events, holidays,
> whatever.

[Tim_Roberts]

Derek Dickinson wrote:

I don’t think there is an issue regarding idea’s that we have on
company time.

However, if you have an idea while lying in bed at night or in the
shower, does the company own it? They weren’t paying you during that
time.

Would I have had the idea if the company had not been paying for the
training, tools, and experimentation time, and a team of
similarly-minded individuals for discussions? If I’m working for IBM,
and I have an idea in the shower for the next great ice cream maker,
then it probably should not belong to IBM. But if I’m working for the
IBM hard drive division, and I have an idea for how to reduce the head
float distance to two atoms, then it probably would not have occurred to
me without IBM’s considerable help.

As I said, it is a complicated situation.

–
Tim Roberts, xxxxx@probo.com
Providenza & Boekelheide, Inc.

[OSR_Community_User]

> You are paid to come to work and create something for a company. They

patent it, or have you do the writing of the patent, but they pay the
patent fees. You should get to keep it? If you work on the assembly
line does that mean you should get to keep all you assemble? I doubt
it. Most employers have you sign an employee agreement that all
‘inventions’ you develop in the course of your work belong to the
company. Some make it very broad so that even something you develop at
home is theirs, but that is probably unenforceable unless it relates to
your employment. If you write code and design a better mousetrap, I
would agree your company should not have the rights to it. Regardless
of your type of job, if you are being paid a salary or hourly wages,
your output should belong to the company. It is a trade made with both
knowing the rules.
As far as I remember my lectures in economics, a decision for or against a
trad is based on an informed choice on both sides. *I* doubt that this
informed choice is given, if the employee has no idea what his invention is
actually worth. Besides that I think that as the inventor you should
automatically get a share - *even* (or especially) if the employer pays him
for *regular* work.
If someone invents something that is not just a trivial patent but a really
new thing, then he deserves a *share* of the money made with the patent.

Interesting idea, but I think that an ‘idea’ I am paid to have, belongs
to those paying me.
If you are paid for having ideas, i.e. your have been hired for only this
purpose, then I agree. But in this case the salary will be reasonable. Today
companies often take ideas free of charge because of the mentality you
describe.

If I don’t want to have those rules controlling my ideas, I don’t have
to take the job. I cannot place some alturistic ‘value’ to my
work in ideas above the work of those who do manual labor. We are both
paid according to the value of our work to those paying us - with legal
considerations being considered.
*If* that is the case, yes.

Still, it would be only fair to give a share of the patent to the inventor.
However, I am not talking about legal issues here, but about “moral” and
“fairness”. Something rarely seen nowadays in business environments.

Cheers,

Oliver

–

May the source be with you, stranger

ICQ: #281645
URL: http://assarbad.net

[OSR_Community_User]

They pay for a job - not for ideas. Companies don’t have ideas -
professionals do. Companies don’t invent - individuals do.

Alberto.

----- Original Message -----
From: “David J. Craig”
Newsgroups: ntdev
To: “Windows System Software Devs Interest List”

Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2006 3:54 PM
Subject: Re:[ntdev] Re:Re:[OT] Disassembler recommendations?

> You are paid to come to work and create something for a
> company. They patent it, or have you do the writing of the
> patent, but they pay the patent fees. You should get to keep
> it? If you work on the assembly line does that mean you
> should get to keep all you assemble? I doubt it. Most
> employers have you sign an employee agreement that all
> ‘inventions’ you develop in the course of your work belong to
> the company. Some make it very broad so that even something
> you develop at home is theirs, but that is probably
> unenforceable unless it relates to your employment. If you
> write code and design a better mousetrap, I would agree your
> company should not have the rights to it. Regardless of your
> type of job, if you are being paid a salary or hourly wages,
> your output should belong to the company. It is a trade made
> with both knowing the rules.
>
> “Alberto Moreira” wrote in message
> news:xxxxx@ntdev…
>> Hey, Bill,
>>
>> The whole of Linux has been built on the idea of free
>> software, and it has benefited a lot of people. Also, patents
>> rarely benefit the creator except very indirectly as a
>> brownie point in one’s resume’. If patents were
>> untransferable and belonged to the creator and not to the
>> corporation, it would be a fair concept; as it is, it’s an
>> aberration. I also like you, Bill, but personally, I will
>> pass.
>>
>> Alberto.
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: “Bill McKenzie”
>> Newsgroups: ntdev
>> To: “Windows System Software Devs Interest List”
>>
>> Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2006 8:02 PM
>> Subject: Re:[ntdev] Re:[OT] Disassembler recommendations?
>>
>>
>>> Software patents seem somewhat specious to me, but then
>>> again I don’t have any My take is that the patent
>>> lawyers don’t have the tools to handle software patents very
>>> well.
>>>
>>> At my last company I saw a guy get a patent for technology
>>> that was a.) blatently obvious, b.) already being used (the
>>> EXACT technology) in shipping products for over 8 years, and
>>> finally c.) covered in almost identical language in a
>>> pre-existing patent. I would say that that patent is about
>>> as useful as a roll of Charmin, and I would not hesitate to
>>> use the technology from that patent in a product for one
>>> second.
>>>
>>> Also, it seems the precedent in software has gone against
>>> patents for the most part.
>>>
>>> All of that said:
>>>
>>>>Meanwhile, I believe it’s our common interest to patent the
>>>>least possible, and to make as much code as we possibly can
>>>>publicly available for the benefit of the whole kernel dev
>>>>community.
>>>
>>> I could not disagree with you more. Giving out free
>>> software (primarily with source), aside from simple starter
>>> examples and/or brief technology demonstrations, is about as
>>> intelligent a move for a developer as building you a free
>>> house. I like you Alberto, but personally, I will pass.
>>>
>>> Bill M.
>>>
>>> “Alberto Moreira” wrote in message
>>> news:xxxxx@ntdev…
>>>> You know, I don’t know much patented real stuff - as
>>>> opposed to obvious stuff - that hasn’t been covered by some
>>>> paper in some journal, and I am of the opinion that a
>>>> pretty large amount of patents out there fall in the
>>>> category I would call “obvious”, and hence they shouldn’t
>>>> have been granted to begin with. But that’s just an
>>>> opinion. As I see it, nothing should be patentable unless
>>>> it passed a strict peer review of forefront researchers: if
>>>> a top quality academic journal wouldn’t publish it, it
>>>> shouldn’t deserve to be patented!
>>>>
>>>> And then, again, the half-life of patented stuff is jolly
>>>> short. Much of the value of a patent, as I see it, is a
>>>> brownie point jotted down against the psychological value
>>>> of a company; they may be pretty nice for bean counters,
>>>> but those of us on the front line of research and
>>>> development shouldn’t need to sweat because of patents.
>>>> Just do it differently, or go find that paper in that
>>>> journal, which preempts the patent to begin with, and use
>>>> it. And you know what ? Chances are that by the time you
>>>> get your development done, the patent is obsolete anyway.
>>>>
>>>> Meanwhile, I believe it’s our common interest to patent the
>>>> least possible, and to make as much code as we possibly can
>>>> publicly available for the benefit of the whole kernel dev
>>>> community.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Alberto.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: “Don Burn”
>>>> Newsgroups: ntdev
>>>> To: “Windows System Software Devs Interest List”
>>>>
>>>> Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006 11:53 AM
>>>> Subject: Re:[ntdev] [OT] Disassembler recommendations?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> “Oliver Schneider” wrote in message
>>>>> news:xxxxx@ntdev…
>>>>>> That’s why we Europeans don’t like (pure) software
>>>>>> patents :o) … it only
>>>>>> benefits those really big companies that already have a
>>>>>> truck-load of patent
>>>>>> applications around the corner of the EU patent office.
>>>>>>
>>>>> I’m sure that OSR who has applied for a software patent
>>>>> appreciates the “really big company” moniker, I know I and
>>>>> my partner do as we apply for our third patent (now if we
>>>>> only had some big firm money).
>>>>>
>>>>> The contention that software patents are all covered by
>>>>> academic research is bullshit. If so then obviously all
>>>>> Computer Science PHD programs should shut down, since
>>>>> there is nothing new to invent or research for a students
>>>>> doctorate!
>>>>>
>>>>> I remember explaining my first software patent to a couple
>>>>> university professors, one got excited thinking is was
>>>>> great. The other said it was obvious and there should be
>>>>> no patent. So I started asking him where it was obvious or
>>>>> prior art. Well the prior art was pretty far afield of the
>>>>> way the patent did it, so we moved on to the obvious
>>>>> comment, at which point he explained that no he had never
>>>>> heard of this but “once you have explained how to do it,
>>>>> it is obvious!”. If patents needed to clear this bar,
>>>>> there would be few useful inventions.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> –
>>>>> Don Burn (MVP, Windows DDK)
>>>>> Windows 2k/XP/2k3 Filesystem and Driver Consulting
>>>>> Remove StopSpam from the email to reply
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> —
>>>>> Questions? First check the Kernel Driver FAQ at
>>>>> http://www.osronline.com/article.cfm?id=256
>>>>>
>>>>> You are currently subscribed to ntdev as:
>>>>> xxxxx@ieee.org
>>>>> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
>>>>> xxxxx@lists.osr.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> —
>>> Questions? First check the Kernel Driver FAQ at
>>> http://www.osronline.com/article.cfm?id=256
>>>
>>> You are currently subscribed to ntdev as: xxxxx@ieee.org
>>> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
>>> xxxxx@lists.osr.com
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> —
> Questions? First check the Kernel Driver FAQ at
> http://www.osronline.com/article.cfm?id=256
>
> You are currently subscribed to ntdev as: xxxxx@ieee.org
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> xxxxx@lists.osr.com

[OSR_Community_User]

Actually, we’re paid to the value set by the job market, and
that’s not quite the same as what a company thinks we’re worth.
And about keeping one’s ideas, just about every company I worked
for during the last 20 years or so demanded upfront that I
signed an agreement saying that whatever I invented was theirs;
which is, as I see it, arm twisting to the nth power. The
system’s so corrupt that the way it works today is not a very
good guide to what would be desirable or even fair.

Alberto.

----- Original Message -----
From: “David J. Craig”
Newsgroups: ntdev
To: “Windows System Software Devs Interest List”

Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2006 5:21 PM
Subject: Re:[ntdev] Re:Re:[OT] Disassembler recommendations?

> Interesting idea, but I think that an ‘idea’ I am paid to
> have, belongs to those paying me. If I don’t want to have
> those rules controlling my ideas, I don’t have to take the
> job. I cannot place some alturistic ‘value’ to my work in
> ideas above the work of those who do manual labor. We are
> both paid according to the value of our work to those paying
> us - with legal considerations being considered. Professional
> sports players are mostly paid for manual labor and while I
> may think they are overpaid, I sure couldn’t, at any point in
> my life, perform at their level. With the change in physical
> fitness of many in the US, aren’t professional class atheletes
> harder to find than an ‘idea’ person?
>
> “Tim Roberts” wrote in message
> news:xxxxx@ntdev…
>> David J. Craig wrote:
>>
>>>You are paid to come to work and create something for a
>>>company. They
>>>patent it, or have you do the writing of the patent, but they
>>>pay the patent
>>>fees. You should get to keep it? If you work on the
>>>assembly line does
>>>that mean you should get to keep all you assemble? I doubt
>>>it. …
>>>Regardless of your type of job, if you are being
>>>paid a salary or hourly wages, your output should belong to
>>>the company. It
>>>is a trade made with both knowing the rules.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> You make a good point, but the other point of view is not
>> without
>> merit. An “idea” is fundamentally different from the
>> production of an
>> assembly line. It isn’t necessarily obvious that ownership
>> of my idea
>> should remain with a company when I leave.
>>
>> Of course, it’s impossible to judge whether I would have had
>> the idea if
>> my employer had not been providing tools and paying me to
>> work in the
>> field, or if I had not been surrounded by people doing
>> related work.
>>
>> It’s a complicated situation.
>>
>> –
>> Tim Roberts, xxxxx@probo.com
>> Providenza & Boekelheide, Inc.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> —
> Questions? First check the Kernel Driver FAQ at
> http://www.osronline.com/article.cfm?id=256
>
> You are currently subscribed to ntdev as: xxxxx@ieee.org
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> xxxxx@lists.osr.com

[OSR_Community_User]

The point of a patent is to enable the creator to capitalize on
the patent’s content to set up his own business. And note the
difference between “license” - which is ok - “transfer” - which
is borderline - and “give it away” - which is definitely not ok.
The way to go about a patent is to set up one’s own shop -
that’s the capitalist ideal behind this country, and that’s what
should be unconditionally encouraged by the legal system.

Alberto.

----- Original Message -----
From: “Ray Trent”
Newsgroups: ntdev
To: “Windows System Software Devs Interest List”

Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2006 4:04 PM
Subject: Re:[ntdev] [OT] Disassembler recommendations?

> Alberto Moreira wrote:
>> except very indirectly as a brownie point in one’s resume’.
>> If patents were untransferable and belonged to the creator
>> and not to the corporation, it would be a fair concept; as it
>> is, it’s an aberration. I
>
> I’ve heard people suggest this a couple of times, but it
> wouldn’t make any difference. In order for their to be a point
> to having a patent at all, surely you’d at least have to be
> able to license it to a corporation, and if you can do that,
> they can just as easily attach a clause granting them a
> permanent, exclusive, transferable license to your patent in
> their employment contract as they do with the actual patents
> now.
> –
> Ray
>
> —
> Questions? First check the Kernel Driver FAQ at
> http://www.osronline.com/article.cfm?id=256
>
> You are currently subscribed to ntdev as: xxxxx@ieee.org
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> xxxxx@lists.osr.com

[OSR_Community_User]

I really don’t see companies helping me having my ideas, it’s
supposed to be the other way around. Companies don’t have
know-how, people do! The “company” doesn’t exist at this level,
it’s just a bunch of individuals. And however much they might
pay for props and labs and what not, neither of those have
patentable ideas either. If I work on hard drives and I have an
idea about hard drives, I should be unconditionally able to
leave the company and set up my own shop to exploit my idea or
technique, and I should be in no way held accountable to share
it with them. Why should I ? In fact, I don’t remember having
been employed anywhere where the flow of ideas and technology
wasn’t from me to the company. Does the company want to exploit
ideas ? They have their principals, their founders, their
officials: that’s where company ideas and technology should come
from - not from us grunts in the rank and file. Our ideas should
be unconditionally ours so that we could set up our own shop and
compete with them if our idea is good enough, that’s what the
system is all about, or at least that’s what it should be.
Otherwise patents don’t protect innovation or innovators - they
protect money and bean counters.

But now, there’s an entrenched mentality in this U.S. of A. that
employees are indentured servants of their employers, and that
corporations are entitled to stiffle competition by preventing
employees from being the free individuals they’re entitled to
be. It’s a JOB, eh ? Just a job. Should stop there.

Alberto.

----- Original Message -----
From: “Tim Roberts”
To: “Windows System Software Devs Interest List”

Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2006 6:28 PM
Subject: Re: [ntdev] Re:Re:[OT] Disassembler recommendations?

> Derek Dickinson wrote:
>
>>
>> I don’t think there is an issue regarding idea’s that we have
>> on
>> company time.
>>
>> However, if you have an idea while lying in bed at night or
>> in the
>> shower, does the company own it? They weren’t paying you
>> during that
>> time.
>
>
> Would I have had the idea if the company had not been paying
> for the
> training, tools, and experimentation time, and a team of
> similarly-minded individuals for discussions? If I’m working
> for IBM,
> and I have an idea in the shower for the next great ice cream
> maker,
> then it probably should not belong to IBM. But if I’m working
> for the
> IBM hard drive division, and I have an idea for how to reduce
> the head
> float distance to two atoms, then it probably would not have
> occurred to
> me without IBM’s considerable help.
>
> As I said, it is a complicated situation.
>
> –
> Tim Roberts, xxxxx@probo.com
> Providenza & Boekelheide, Inc.
>
>
>
> —
> Questions? First check the Kernel Driver FAQ at
> http://www.osronline.com/article.cfm?id=256
>
> You are currently subscribed to ntdev as: xxxxx@ieee.org
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> xxxxx@lists.osr.com

[David_J_Craig]

I have had a couple of companies do that, but my latest does not. It
requires that I assign all inventions I create for them to them, but not a
new mousetrap or something outside of that company’s area. Of course, I
probably won’t invent something that isn’t related, but I knew that when I
took the job and agreed to follow their rules. How can that be arm
twisting? You can ask for the agreements before you accept the job and then
decide to say no if they make an offer. It depends upon your motivation.
Do you need the job or the freedom more? Be happy you aren’t in the
military. They tell where to go, what to do, and when to do it and your
only option is jail except for the one time every four years when you can
resign.

“Alberto Moreira” wrote in message news:xxxxx@ntdev…
> Actually, we’re paid to the value set by the job market, and that’s not
> quite the same as what a company thinks we’re worth. And about keeping
> one’s ideas, just about every company I worked for during the last 20
> years or so demanded upfront that I signed an agreement saying that
> whatever I invented was theirs; which is, as I see it, arm twisting to the
> nth power. The system’s so corrupt that the way it works today is not a
> very good guide to what would be desirable or even fair.
>
> Alberto.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: “David J. Craig”
> Newsgroups: ntdev
> To: “Windows System Software Devs Interest List”
> Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2006 5:21 PM
> Subject: Re:[ntdev] Re:Re:[OT] Disassembler recommendations?
>
>
>> Interesting idea, but I think that an ‘idea’ I am paid to have, belongs
>> to those paying me. If I don’t want to have those rules controlling my
>> ideas, I don’t have to take the job. I cannot place some alturistic
>> ‘value’ to my work in ideas above the work of those who do manual labor.
>> We are both paid according to the value of our work to those paying us -
>> with legal considerations being considered. Professional sports players
>> are mostly paid for manual labor and while I may think they are overpaid,
>> I sure couldn’t, at any point in my life, perform at their level. With
>> the change in physical fitness of many in the US, aren’t professional
>> class atheletes harder to find than an ‘idea’ person?
>>
>> “Tim Roberts” wrote in message news:xxxxx@ntdev…
>>> David J. Craig wrote:
>>>
>>>>You are paid to come to work and create something for a company. They
>>>>patent it, or have you do the writing of the patent, but they pay the
>>>>patent
>>>>fees. You should get to keep it? If you work on the assembly line does
>>>>that mean you should get to keep all you assemble? I doubt it. …
>>>>Regardless of your type of job, if you are being
>>>>paid a salary or hourly wages, your output should belong to the company.
>>>>It
>>>>is a trade made with both knowing the rules.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> You make a good point, but the other point of view is not without
>>> merit. An “idea” is fundamentally different from the production of an
>>> assembly line. It isn’t necessarily obvious that ownership of my idea
>>> should remain with a company when I leave.
>>>
>>> Of course, it’s impossible to judge whether I would have had the idea if
>>> my employer had not been providing tools and paying me to work in the
>>> field, or if I had not been surrounded by people doing related work.
>>>
>>> It’s a complicated situation.
>>>
>>> –
>>> Tim Roberts, xxxxx@probo.com
>>> Providenza & Boekelheide, Inc.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> —
>> Questions? First check the Kernel Driver FAQ at
>> http://www.osronline.com/article.cfm?id=256
>>
>> You are currently subscribed to ntdev as: xxxxx@ieee.org
>> To unsubscribe send a blank email to xxxxx@lists.osr.com
>
>
>

[David_J_Craig]

You can do that if you teach in some if not most schools. I just cannot
agree with the one way statement. The company pays for the tools and
provide me an income so I don’t have to dive into the dumpsters to find
dinner. If I was rich, then I would stay a consultant or just retire. I
can’t understand those who have made all that money who keep going after it.
I do this because I enjoy it, but I have a family I could learn to enjoy
even more. My wife might object though.

“Alberto Moreira” wrote in message news:xxxxx@ntdev…
>I really don’t see companies helping me having my ideas, it’s supposed to
>be the other way around. Companies don’t have know-how, people do! The
>“company” doesn’t exist at this level, it’s just a bunch of individuals.
>And however much they might pay for props and labs and what not, neither of
>those have patentable ideas either. If I work on hard drives and I have an
>idea about hard drives, I should be unconditionally able to leave the
>company and set up my own shop to exploit my idea or technique, and I
>should be in no way held accountable to share it with them. Why should I ?
>In fact, I don’t remember having been employed anywhere where the flow of
>ideas and technology wasn’t from me to the company. Does the company want
>to exploit ideas ? They have their principals, their founders, their
>officials: that’s where company ideas and technology should come from - not
>from us grunts in the rank and file. Our ideas should be unconditionally
>ours so that we could set up our own shop and compete with them if our idea
>is good enough, that’s what the system is all about, or at least that’s
>what it should be. Otherwise patents don’t protect innovation or
>innovators - they protect money and bean counters.
>
> But now, there’s an entrenched mentality in this U.S. of A. that employees
> are indentured servants of their employers, and that corporations are
> entitled to stiffle competition by preventing employees from being the
> free individuals they’re entitled to be. It’s a JOB, eh ? Just a job.
> Should stop there.
>
> Alberto.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: “Tim Roberts”
> To: “Windows System Software Devs Interest List”
> Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2006 6:28 PM
> Subject: Re: [ntdev] Re:Re:[OT] Disassembler recommendations?
>
>
>> Derek Dickinson wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I don’t think there is an issue regarding idea’s that we have on
>>> company time.
>>>
>>> However, if you have an idea while lying in bed at night or in the
>>> shower, does the company own it? They weren’t paying you during that
>>> time.
>>
>>
>> Would I have had the idea if the company had not been paying for the
>> training, tools, and experimentation time, and a team of
>> similarly-minded individuals for discussions? If I’m working for IBM,
>> and I have an idea in the shower for the next great ice cream maker,
>> then it probably should not belong to IBM. But if I’m working for the
>> IBM hard drive division, and I have an idea for how to reduce the head
>> float distance to two atoms, then it probably would not have occurred to
>> me without IBM’s considerable help.
>>
>> As I said, it is a complicated situation.
>>
>> –
>> Tim Roberts, xxxxx@probo.com
>> Providenza & Boekelheide, Inc.
>>
>>
>>
>> —
>> Questions? First check the Kernel Driver FAQ at
>> http://www.osronline.com/article.cfm?id=256
>>
>> You are currently subscribed to ntdev as: xxxxx@ieee.org
>> To unsubscribe send a blank email to xxxxx@lists.osr.com
>
>
>

[David_J_Craig]

A mechanic is paid by the job or hour. When his job is over, the employer’s right to his services terminate. If he sells or gives his services to other, the employer has no rights. Someone on a salary is a little different. An idea may start in your subconscious at work, but not emerge until you sleep or in the shower the next morning, week, or later. The employer owns the product of your mind, but until they invent mind readers they would have a problem owning my mind.
“Derek Dickinson” wrote in message news:xxxxx@ntdev…
Hello David,

I don’t think there is an issue regarding idea’s that we have on company time.

However, if you have an idea while lying in bed at night or in the shower, does the company own it? They weren’t paying you during that time.

If a mechanic fixes a friend’s car at home during the evening does his primary employer get the proceeds?

Of course, it can get really messy if someone is moonlighting Say you have multiple contracts with different employers and you have an idea on your own time that crosses over. Who owns the idea?

I’m not saying you are wrong overall, just that the manual labor analogy is incorrect. In a legal sense, we are NOT treated as well as a manual laborer.

We do not necessarily own an idea we have on our own time. The only issue regards to what degree. Usually ideas unrelated to your employment are our own but all other ideas are the company’s. You could say that the employer owns your mind in some restricted sense.

Derek

“David J. Craig” wrote:
Interesting idea, but I think that an ‘idea’ I am paid to have, belongs to
those paying me. If I don’t want to have those rules controlling my ideas,
I don’t have to take the job. I cannot place some alturistic ‘value’ to my
work in ideas above the work of those who do manual labor. We are both paid
according to the value of our work to those paying us - with legal
considerations being considered. Professional sports players are mostly
paid for manual labor and while I may think they are overpaid, I sure
couldn’t, at any point in my life, perform at their level. With the change
in physical fitness of many in the US, aren’t professional class atheletes
harder to find than an ‘idea’ person?

“Tim Roberts” wrote in message news:xxxxx@ntdev…
> David J. Craig wrote:
>
>>You are paid to come to work and create something for a company. They
>>patent it, or have you do the writing of the patent, but they pay the
>>patent
>>fees. You should get to keep it? If you work on the assembly line does
>>that mean you should get to keep all you assemble? I doubt it. …
>>Regardless of your type of job, if you are being
>>paid a salary or hourly wages, your output should belong to the company.
>>It
>>is a trade made with both knowing the rules.
>>
>>
>
> You make a good point, but the other point of view is not without
> merit. An “idea” is fundamentally different from the production of an
> assembly line. It isn’t necessarily obvious that ownership of my idea
> should remain with a company when I leave.
>
> Of course, it’s impossible to judge whether I would have had the idea if
> my employer had not been providing tools and paying me to work in the
> field, or if I had not been surrounded by people doing related work.
>
> It’s a complicated situation.
>
> –
> Tim Roberts, xxxxx@probo.com
> Providenza & Boekelheide, Inc.
>
>
>

—
Questions? First check the Kernel Driver FAQ at http://www.osronline.com/article.cfm?id=256

You are currently subscribed to ntdev as: xxxxx@yahoo.com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to xxxxx@lists.osr.com

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Photos
Ring in the New Year with Photo Calendars. Add photos, events, holidays, whatever.

[bank_kus]

Ok now that did sound like saying academicians dive into the dumpster for a
living. Gee my thesis advisor in school was a RICH RIch man:-))

But on a different note, what is the process for selecting a work for patent
in the US. Who reviews it for originality/ contribution to research /
innovation / soundness / feasibility of application. And as Alberto pointed
out, is it truly done by research peers ? I mean compare the rigorous
process that a publication for a journal or someplace like ACM SIGGRAPH
would go into, is it the same for a patent?

banks

“David J. Craig” wrote in message
news:xxxxx@ntdev…
> You can do that if you teach in some if not most schools. I just cannot
> agree with the one way statement. The company pays for the tools and
> provide me an income so I don’t have to dive into the dumpsters to find
> dinner. If I was rich, then I would stay a consultant or just retire. I
> can’t understand those who have made all that money who keep going after
> it. I do this because I enjoy it, but I have a family I could learn to
> enjoy even more. My wife might object though.
>
> “Alberto Moreira” wrote in message news:xxxxx@ntdev…
>>I really don’t see companies helping me having my ideas, it’s supposed to
>>be the other way around. Companies don’t have know-how, people do! The
>>“company” doesn’t exist at this level, it’s just a bunch of individuals.
>>And however much they might pay for props and labs and what not, neither
>>of those have patentable ideas either. If I work on hard drives and I have
>>an idea about hard drives, I should be unconditionally able to leave the
>>company and set up my own shop to exploit my idea or technique, and I
>>should be in no way held accountable to share it with them. Why should I ?
>>In fact, I don’t remember having been employed anywhere where the flow of
>>ideas and technology wasn’t from me to the company. Does the company want
>>to exploit ideas ? They have their principals, their founders, their
>>officials: that’s where company ideas and technology should come from -
>>not from us grunts in the rank and file. Our ideas should be
>>unconditionally ours so that we could set up our own shop and compete with
>>them if our idea is good enough, that’s what the system is all about, or
>>at least that’s what it should be. Otherwise patents don’t protect
>>innovation or innovators - they protect money and bean counters.
>>
>> But now, there’s an entrenched mentality in this U.S. of A. that
>> employees are indentured servants of their employers, and that
>> corporations are entitled to stiffle competition by preventing employees
>> from being the free individuals they’re entitled to be. It’s a JOB, eh ?
>> Just a job. Should stop there.
>>
>> Alberto.
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: “Tim Roberts”
>> To: “Windows System Software Devs Interest List”
>> Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2006 6:28 PM
>> Subject: Re: [ntdev] Re:Re:[OT] Disassembler recommendations?
>>
>>
>>> Derek Dickinson wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I don’t think there is an issue regarding idea’s that we have on
>>>> company time.
>>>>
>>>> However, if you have an idea while lying in bed at night or in the
>>>> shower, does the company own it? They weren’t paying you during that
>>>> time.
>>>
>>>
>>> Would I have had the idea if the company had not been paying for the
>>> training, tools, and experimentation time, and a team of
>>> similarly-minded individuals for discussions? If I’m working for IBM,
>>> and I have an idea in the shower for the next great ice cream maker,
>>> then it probably should not belong to IBM. But if I’m working for the
>>> IBM hard drive division, and I have an idea for how to reduce the head
>>> float distance to two atoms, then it probably would not have occurred to
>>> me without IBM’s considerable help.
>>>
>>> As I said, it is a complicated situation.
>>>
>>> –
>>> Tim Roberts, xxxxx@probo.com
>>> Providenza & Boekelheide, Inc.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> —
>>> Questions? First check the Kernel Driver FAQ at
>>> http://www.osronline.com/article.cfm?id=256
>>>
>>> You are currently subscribed to ntdev as: xxxxx@ieee.org
>>> To unsubscribe send a blank email to xxxxx@lists.osr.com
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>

[OSR_Community_User]

You know, this is supposed to be a free country; I agreed to
take their job, but I don’t see why I should agree to follow any
company rules that don’t have to do with the strict act of doing
a job for them. I am not a part of their business, I’m not their
property or their chattel, I’m there to do a job, period. I find
it absurd that I’m forced to assume any business obligations of
or with my employer, their business is none of mine - my
business is called “Alberto & Family, Limited”. I’m there today,
I’m elsewhere tomorrow, and all I’m doing to them is a job. No
more.

Invention assignment agreements should be illegal, period, no
ifs no buts. And if you have no choice because everybody in town
asks for such an agreement, pretending there’s a choice is
basically a lie. If everybody requires an invention assignment
agreement, there’s no choice but to leave the profession
altogether. Is that what American freedom is all about ? I hope
not.

Moreover, the company doesn’t do me any kind of favor by hiring
me, it’s a bilateral agreement between equals. They need my
expertise and my work to have a product to sell and to make
money, and if they don’t get someone to do that job, make money
with that product they won’t. Furthermore, chances are that if
push comes to shove I’m not going to dive into the dumpsters but
bite the bullet and set up my own shop, maybe even competing
with them: I look around myself and I see a lot of people who
did just that. Again, it’s a job, nothing more: an agreement to
perform a function for a specified amount of money. It should
stop there.

About academia, I’m a professor too, and they too got me to sign
an invention assignment document.

Alberto.

----- Original Message -----
From: “David J. Craig”
Newsgroups: ntdev
To: “Windows System Software Devs Interest List”

Sent: Thursday, January 05, 2006 1:10 AM
Subject: Re:[ntdev] Re:Re:[OT] Disassembler recommendations?

> You can do that if you teach in some if not most schools. I
> just cannot agree with the one way statement. The company
> pays for the tools and provide me an income so I don’t have to
> dive into the dumpsters to find dinner. If I was rich, then I
> would stay a consultant or just retire. I can’t understand
> those who have made all that money who keep going after it. I
> do this because I enjoy it, but I have a family I could learn
> to enjoy even more. My wife might object though.
>
> “Alberto Moreira” wrote in message
> news:xxxxx@ntdev…
>>I really don’t see companies helping me having my ideas, it’s
>>supposed to be the other way around. Companies don’t have
>>know-how, people do! The “company” doesn’t exist at this
>>level, it’s just a bunch of individuals. And however much they
>>might pay for props and labs and what not, neither of those
>>have patentable ideas either. If I work on hard drives and I
>>have an idea about hard drives, I should be unconditionally
>>able to leave the company and set up my own shop to exploit my
>>idea or technique, and I should be in no way held accountable
>>to share it with them. Why should I ? In fact, I don’t
>>remember having been employed anywhere where the flow of ideas
>>and technology wasn’t from me to the company. Does the company
>>want to exploit ideas ? They have their principals, their
>>founders, their officials: that’s where company ideas and
>>technology should come from - not from us grunts in the rank
>>and file. Our ideas should be unconditionally ours so that we
>>could set up our own shop and compete with them if our idea is
>>good enough, that’s what the system is all about, or at least
>>that’s what it should be. Otherwise patents don’t protect
>>innovation or innovators - they protect money and bean
>>counters.
>>
>> But now, there’s an entrenched mentality in this U.S. of A.
>> that employees are indentured servants of their employers,
>> and that corporations are entitled to stiffle competition by
>> preventing employees from being the free individuals they’re
>> entitled to be. It’s a JOB, eh ? Just a job. Should stop
>> there.
>>
>> Alberto.
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: “Tim Roberts”
>> To: “Windows System Software Devs Interest List”
>>
>> Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2006 6:28 PM
>> Subject: Re: [ntdev] Re:Re:[OT] Disassembler recommendations?
>>
>>
>>> Derek Dickinson wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I don’t think there is an issue regarding idea’s that we
>>>> have on
>>>> company time.
>>>>
>>>> However, if you have an idea while lying in bed at night or
>>>> in the
>>>> shower, does the company own it? They weren’t paying you
>>>> during that
>>>> time.
>>>
>>>
>>> Would I have had the idea if the company had not been paying
>>> for the
>>> training, tools, and experimentation time, and a team of
>>> similarly-minded individuals for discussions? If I’m
>>> working for IBM,
>>> and I have an idea in the shower for the next great ice
>>> cream maker,
>>> then it probably should not belong to IBM. But if I’m
>>> working for the
>>> IBM hard drive division, and I have an idea for how to
>>> reduce the head
>>> float distance to two atoms, then it probably would not have
>>> occurred to
>>> me without IBM’s considerable help.
>>>
>>> As I said, it is a complicated situation.
>>>
>>> –
>>> Tim Roberts, xxxxx@probo.com
>>> Providenza & Boekelheide, Inc.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> —
>>> Questions? First check the Kernel Driver FAQ at
>>> http://www.osronline.com/article.cfm?id=256
>>>
>>> You are currently subscribed to ntdev as: xxxxx@ieee.org
>>> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
>>> xxxxx@lists.osr.com
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> —
> Questions? First check the Kernel Driver FAQ at
> http://www.osronline.com/article.cfm?id=256
>
> You are currently subscribed to ntdev as: xxxxx@ieee.org
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> xxxxx@lists.osr.com

[OSR_Community_User]

This has nothing to do with salary. I have had hourly contracts with the same restrictions.

“David J. Craig” wrote: A mechanic is paid by the job or hour. When his job is over, the employer’s right to his services terminate. If he sells or gives his services to other, the employer has no rights. Someone on a salary is a little different. An idea may start in your subconscious at work, but not emerge until you sleep or in the shower the next morning, week, or later. The employer owns the product of your mind, but until they invent mind readers they would have a problem owning my mind.
“Derek Dickinson” wrote in message news:xxxxx@ntdev…
Hello David,

I don’t think there is an issue regarding idea’s that we have on company time.

However, if you have an idea while lying in bed at night or in the shower, does the company own it? They weren’t paying you during that time.

If a mechanic fixes a friend’s car at home during the evening does his primary employer get the proceeds?

Of course, it can get really messy if someone is moonlighting Say you have multiple contracts with different employers and you have an idea on your own time that crosses over. Who owns the idea?

I’m not saying you are wrong overall, just that the manual labor analogy is incorrect. In a legal sense, we are NOT treated as well as a manual laborer.

We do not necessarily own an idea we have on our own time. The only issue regards to what degree. Usually ideas unrelated to your employment are our own but all other ideas are the company’s. You could say that the employer owns your mind in some restricted sense.

Derek

“David J. Craig” wrote: Interesting idea, but I think that an ‘idea’ I am paid to have, belongs to
those paying me. If I don’t want to have those rules controlling my ideas,
I don’t have to take the job. I cannot place some alturistic ‘value’ to my
work in ideas above the work of those who do manual labor. We are both paid
according to the value of our work to those paying us - with legal
considerations being considered. Professional sports players are mostly
paid for manual labor and while I may think they are overpaid, I sure
couldn’t, at any point in my life, perform at their level. With the change
in physical fitness of many in the US, aren’t professional class atheletes
harder to find than an ‘idea’ person?

“Tim Roberts” wrote in message news:xxxxx@ntdev…
> David J. Craig wrote:
>
>>You are paid to come to work and create something for a company. They
>>patent it, or have you do the writing of the patent, but they pay the
>>patent
>>fees. You should get to keep it? If you work on the assembly line does
>>that mean you should get to keep all you assemble? I doubt it. …
>>Regardless of your type of job, if you are being
>>paid a salary or hourly wages, your output should belong to the company.
>>It
>>is a trade made with both knowing the rules.
>>
>>
>
> You make a good point, but the other point of view is not without
> merit. An “idea” is fundamentally different from the production of an
> assembly line. It isn’t necessarily obvious that ownership of my idea
> should remain with a company when I leave.
>
> Of course, it’s impossible to judge whether I would have had the idea if
> my employer had not been providing tools and paying me to work in the
> field, or if I had not been surrounded by people doing related work.
>
> It’s a complicated situation.
>
> –
> Tim Roberts, xxxxx@probo.com
> Providenza & Boekelheide, Inc.
>
>
>

—
Questions? First check the Kernel Driver FAQ at http://www.osronline.com/article.cfm?id=256

You are currently subscribed to ntdev as: xxxxx@yahoo.com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to xxxxx@lists.osr.com

---------------------------------
Yahoo! Photos
Ring in the New Year with Photo Calendars. Add photos, events, holidays, whatever.
—
Questions? First check the Kernel Driver FAQ at http://www.osronline.com/article.cfm?id=256

You are currently subscribed to ntdev as: unknown lmsubst tag argument: ‘’
To unsubscribe send a blank email to xxxxx@lists.osr.com

---------------------------------
Yahoo! Photos
Ring in the New Year with Photo Calendars. Add photos, events, holidays, whatever.