Microsoft, Autodesk lose patent appeal
-
Where I work if I patent anything (even if not related to my work) they own the rights.
I agree with Danny Boy up yonder, if it's on your time, it's your patent. However, if it's on their time, well that's their patent.
"On one of my cards it said I had to find temperatures lower than -8. The numbers I uncovered were -6 and -7 so I thought I had won, and so did the woman in the shop. But when she scanned the card the machine said I hadn't. "I phoned Camelot and they fobbed me off with some story that -6 is higher - not lower - than -8 but I'm not having it." -Tina Farrell, a 23 year old thicky from Levenshulme, Manchester.
-
that's pretty standard in the US. typically, they'll also own the rights to anything you do, even in your off-work time, that relates (in their eyes) to their business.
Isn't it a question of proof? No company can "own" what you do in your own time, however if you do something that is business related, and then use that at work, if you can't prove that you did it in your own time you're a bit scuppered.
"On one of my cards it said I had to find temperatures lower than -8. The numbers I uncovered were -6 and -7 so I thought I had won, and so did the woman in the shop. But when she scanned the card the machine said I hadn't. "I phoned Camelot and they fobbed me off with some story that -6 is higher - not lower - than -8 but I'm not having it." -Tina Farrell, a 23 year old thicky from Levenshulme, Manchester.
-
I agree with Danny Boy up yonder, if it's on your time, it's your patent. However, if it's on their time, well that's their patent.
"On one of my cards it said I had to find temperatures lower than -8. The numbers I uncovered were -6 and -7 so I thought I had won, and so did the woman in the shop. But when she scanned the card the machine said I hadn't. "I phoned Camelot and they fobbed me off with some story that -6 is higher - not lower - than -8 but I'm not having it." -Tina Farrell, a 23 year old thicky from Levenshulme, Manchester.
Commonsense doesn't come into it - you need to check your employment contract. From my experience the most common arrangement is for the employer to have the rights to anything related to your work that you develop whilst employed there - whether you develop it at home on your hardware or not.
Peter "Until the invention of the computer, the machine gun was the device that enabled humans to make the most mistakes in the smallest amount of time."
-
Isn't it a question of proof? No company can "own" what you do in your own time, however if you do something that is business related, and then use that at work, if you can't prove that you did it in your own time you're a bit scuppered.
"On one of my cards it said I had to find temperatures lower than -8. The numbers I uncovered were -6 and -7 so I thought I had won, and so did the woman in the shop. But when she scanned the card the machine said I hadn't. "I phoned Camelot and they fobbed me off with some story that -6 is higher - not lower - than -8 but I'm not having it." -Tina Farrell, a 23 year old thicky from Levenshulme, Manchester.
martin_hughes wrote:
Isn't it a question of proof?
It's generally a question of what you signed. Most companies would be considered negligent if they didn't have such clauses in their employment contracts. From their perspective they take on a new employee and expose them to all their corporate secrets and current R&D. Without any contractual protection the employee could, in their own time, develop a better widget at home, and then go and patent it!
Peter "Until the invention of the computer, the machine gun was the device that enabled humans to make the most mistakes in the smallest amount of time."
-
Chris Losinger wrote:
even in your off-work time, that relates (in their eyes) to their business
They can try, but they would have a hard time enforcing it in court.
More people died from worry than ever bled to death. - RAH
their full-time legal staff v. your out-of-pocket lawyer.
-
Isn't it a question of proof? No company can "own" what you do in your own time, however if you do something that is business related, and then use that at work, if you can't prove that you did it in your own time you're a bit scuppered.
"On one of my cards it said I had to find temperatures lower than -8. The numbers I uncovered were -6 and -7 so I thought I had won, and so did the woman in the shop. But when she scanned the card the machine said I hadn't. "I phoned Camelot and they fobbed me off with some story that -6 is higher - not lower - than -8 but I'm not having it." -Tina Farrell, a 23 year old thicky from Levenshulme, Manchester.
martin_hughes wrote:
No company can "own" what you do in your own time
they can if you sign papers saying they can
-
Commonsense doesn't come into it - you need to check your employment contract. From my experience the most common arrangement is for the employer to have the rights to anything related to your work that you develop whilst employed there - whether you develop it at home on your hardware or not.
Peter "Until the invention of the computer, the machine gun was the device that enabled humans to make the most mistakes in the smallest amount of time."
My fist, belligerence, embarrasing-to-the-clowns-I-work-for-enabled-insider-knowledge, access to every customer we've ever dealt with and all round "just try me!" attitude overrides my contract :-D Also, I'm pretty sure that your employer cannot legally claim ownership of stuff you do on your time regardless of any contract you've signed unless you are paid or compensated for it.
"On one of my cards it said I had to find temperatures lower than -8. The numbers I uncovered were -6 and -7 so I thought I had won, and so did the woman in the shop. But when she scanned the card the machine said I hadn't. "I phoned Camelot and they fobbed me off with some story that -6 is higher - not lower - than -8 but I'm not having it." -Tina Farrell, a 23 year old thicky from Levenshulme, Manchester.
-
their full-time legal staff v. your out-of-pocket lawyer.
-
If you can afford to patent something you can certainly afford a lawyer to fight it and precedent is on your side. I doubt they would even try.
More people died from worry than ever bled to death. - RAH
John Cardinal wrote:
precedent is on your side
not really.
Agreements requiring the transfer of all ideas, innovations and creations made in the scope of the employer's business, regardless of whether they were made during normal working hours or on company premises, have been found to be valid. On the other hand, those requiring the assignment of everything an employee does, even if it has no relation to the employer's business, are generally invalid. Provisions in employment agreements which cover inventions conceived even before employment have been held valid, and provisions which cover inventions made after termination of employment have also been held valid.
http://www.dwpm.com/content/main/inventions_workplace.php3[^]
-
Commonsense doesn't come into it - you need to check your employment contract. From my experience the most common arrangement is for the employer to have the rights to anything related to your work that you develop whilst employed there - whether you develop it at home on your hardware or not.
Peter "Until the invention of the computer, the machine gun was the device that enabled humans to make the most mistakes in the smallest amount of time."
Some jurisdictions, e.g. Kalifornia, have enacted legislation specifically forbidding employers from claiming IP developed by their employees on the employees own time using the employees own resources. I know, because my employment contract specifically excludes California-based employees from some of it's provisions.
-
Marc Clifton wrote:
when I reincarnate as a woman, I'm going to be a strip club dancing lawyer.
Hopefully with far less facial hair ... ;P
:..::. Douglas H. Troy ::..
Bad Astronomy |VCF|wxWidgets|WTL -
Z4 Technologies Inc. sued Microsoft and Autodesk Inc., maker of drafting software, in 2004, claiming the technology they used to activate newly installed software and deter piracy infringed on patents created and owned by David Colvin, the owner of privately held z4. Commerce Township, Mich.-based z4 argued that Microsoft's Windows XP and Office 2003 suite of productivity software used its patented method of asking computer users to supply two passwords, or authorization codes, before they could fully use new software. The technology in question also can be used to deactivate software. In April 2006, a federal jury in East Texas ordered Microsoft to pay $115 million to z4, plus attorney fees and $25 million for willful patent infringement. Microsoft, which had argued that the patents were invalid, appealed the decision. The jury also ordered Autodesk to pay $18 million to z4. link hope its not a repost...
_________________________ "When the superior man refrains from acting, his force is felt for a thousand li." Sun Tzu
The question is "Why would anyone want to build a successful business, it will get sued out of existance anyway.."? Maybe someday, people will get the bright idea (not patented) to do the world a favor and get rid of all software patents!
Rocky <>< Blog Post: RegularExpressionValidator Ignore Case Tech Blog Post: Cheap Biofuels and Synthetics coming soon?
-
Lawyers. They should all be put against a wall and shot. However, I expect anyone attempting such an act of supreme benfit to the human race would find themselves being sued by said lawyers for infringing upon several patents, including "Wall", "Firing Squad" and "Blind fold", and be lamabsted by the anti-smoking lobby for daring to offer a final cigarette.
"On one of my cards it said I had to find temperatures lower than -8. The numbers I uncovered were -6 and -7 so I thought I had won, and so did the woman in the shop. But when she scanned the card the machine said I hadn't. "I phoned Camelot and they fobbed me off with some story that -6 is higher - not lower - than -8 but I'm not having it." -Tina Farrell, a 23 year old thicky from Levenshulme, Manchester.
[Lawyers. They should all be put against a wall and shot.] What a ridiculous comment! First you would be breaking health and safety rules (bet you haven't even done a risk assessment). Second this is a total and utter waste of good ammunition that could be better used elsewhere, not to mention the effect on global warming. Ok - concede your action would get rid of a lot of hot air :)
-
[Lawyers. They should all be put against a wall and shot.] What a ridiculous comment! First you would be breaking health and safety rules (bet you haven't even done a risk assessment). Second this is a total and utter waste of good ammunition that could be better used elsewhere, not to mention the effect on global warming. Ok - concede your action would get rid of a lot of hot air :)
:laugh:
"On one of my cards it said I had to find temperatures lower than -8. The numbers I uncovered were -6 and -7 so I thought I had won, and so did the woman in the shop. But when she scanned the card the machine said I hadn't. "I phoned Camelot and they fobbed me off with some story that -6 is higher - not lower - than -8 but I'm not having it." -Tina Farrell, a 23 year old thicky from Levenshulme, Manchester.
-
Pete O`Hanlon wrote:
The therapist I'm going to have to see to get that image out of my mind.
I'll have to figure out how create a therapist, politician, stripper, lawyer job. That would make for an interesting character on an MMP roleplaying game. Marc
Marc Clifton wrote:
therapist, politician, stripper, lawyer job
That sells insurance and owns a college book store.
Try code model generation tools at BoneSoft.com.
-
My fist, belligerence, embarrasing-to-the-clowns-I-work-for-enabled-insider-knowledge, access to every customer we've ever dealt with and all round "just try me!" attitude overrides my contract :-D Also, I'm pretty sure that your employer cannot legally claim ownership of stuff you do on your time regardless of any contract you've signed unless you are paid or compensated for it.
"On one of my cards it said I had to find temperatures lower than -8. The numbers I uncovered were -6 and -7 so I thought I had won, and so did the woman in the shop. But when she scanned the card the machine said I hadn't. "I phoned Camelot and they fobbed me off with some story that -6 is higher - not lower - than -8 but I'm not having it." -Tina Farrell, a 23 year old thicky from Levenshulme, Manchester.
It just doesn't work that way because you feel it's right or just. Consider it from the employer's point of view (and that of the courts, too.): You used their resources to gain some knowledge. Assuming they don't key-stroke log you, that knowledge is assumed to be related to the work you do for them. They have, therefore, paid you to get that knowlege and use it (supposedly) for their benefit. Now the scenario of taking the knowlege they paid you to aquire and using it for personal gain is, no matter what the venue, using their resources for your benefit. It matters not where you are at the time. I have, in fact, recently asked this question of an intellectual property lawyer. In this case, it would relate to my use of software obtained via the MSDN subscription they paid for installed on my home systems. Interestingly, it's not the same thing (in general) - although he did have questions as to just who owns the software (me or employer). The parallel scenario would be that if you borrowed your employer's hammer, he doesn't have rights to everything you build with it. But wait - how is that different than your use of knowledge to develop software at home? What's the difference? It has to do with some judicial difference between the act of creation (not actually bestowed by the hammer) that is a direct consequence of your employment. This type of ruling, by the way, differs for employee vs contractor. The terms of the contract can them come into play. Didn't sign one? In either case, but particularly in the case of the employee, their are implied rights. Can this all get worse? Back when I was a federal employee, it was illegal for me to speak (or do anything else) on anything related to my field for any sort of remuneration. This was so broadly interpreted by the gov't that basically you didn't do anything for money outside of work. The purpose was to not give the public the impression that you were using skills and knowlege gained by your government service (i.e., tax dollars) for personal gain. In practice, you could lose your job (and pension) for accepting lunch from a vendor. Anything worth more than about a buck was illegal. Yes - that included frequent flyer miles. Note that those who wrote the law, senators and congressmen, limited it to the executive branch. They could still cash in on anything and everything. Bottom line: the law isn't what you feel like it should be - it 'simply' is what it is.
-
This case baffles me. One of the two patents was filed six months AFTER Windows XP was released. The other was granted eighteen months before XP's release. Both are obvious to anyone working in the field, a point the supreme court recently emphasized. I suspect it will be appealed to the supreme court on this basis, but who knows the outcome since the system makes no sense.
Anyone who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than people do is a swine. - P.J. O'Rourke
Hear, hear!
____________________________________________________________________________ "Space is big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind- bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist's, but that's just peanuts to space." -- Douglas Adams -- Shohom67
-
Many people says that in US you can patent anything if you're the first applying the patent even if there are people that implementing the idea before, so you can patent how people shake hands or patent the corn for use as seed, or rice for use in candies or even the way to drink a water glass. Well, there is some stories about some chem-lab that patented native knowledge like the use of some plants as pain-killers, so they comercialized something that at first place was obvious just because they filled the papers first, and a company that patented a muted cow.
Yes it seems you can patent almost anything: http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/United\_States\_patent\_number:6368227 ("A method of swinging on a swing", which I for one independently discovered years earlier, along with surely millions of other children). It's an truly unbelievable system that seems to have almost entirely negative effects. Companies exist solely to buy up clearly invalid but legal patents and sue companies for $100 million that are trying to create new products. There is nothing good at all there.