Open Metal Detector Project Charter

[chudster]

And here is another point. Are you committing patent infringement or incitement or encouragement to commit patent infringement by providing/publishing/discussing the means eg to uploading data to a MC by finding methods that get around a patent ( non infringing methods) due to the patents omissions or errors?
dougAEGPF

These are better answered by a patent attorney which I am not.

However:

1) Doing your best not to infringe is respecting IP.

2) There is no offence that I am aware of for working around a patent.

3) In terms of errors and omissions in a patent that could only be assessed on a case by case basis but a patent stands as to the claims allowed by the examiner until it is challenged in some way. Errors and omissions probably come under the defence that there is a defect or there was fraud.

It is notable that there are about 20 defenses in the US to patent infringement and probably a similar number in other jurisdictions.

http://freddouglas.wordpress.com/201...ingement-suit/

Consult your lawyer to work through the appropriate list for your jurisdiction but its pretty simple if you stick to experimental use or similar exemptions.

Chudster

[chudster]

Sorry Doug. You are a liar. Posts were removed from general visibility. Using your criteria, any post removed from a forum is not deleted as it is still retained in the forum database. It is evident that the description of you as being a "Boil on the Butt of Humanity" does not go near far enough as it does not describe your lack of ethics.

Doug and Urbanfox,

Please have this discussion elsewhere. It has diverted from being on topic.

For instance, there is a QED thread and there are other forums.

Thanks

Chudster

[chudster]

I have had just about every brand of detector made from the early BFO's of the 60's. Whites, Garrett, Fisher, Bountyhunter, Minelab, etc. For gold hunting I use a 2200 Minelab. I have a old Garrett Ground Hog still I dig out now and then for coin shooting old areas.

Thanks.

Could you just clear up that you are a bona fide hobbyist. That is not a dealer, detector modder and that you do not make your living in the detector industry. No problem if you are not, it should just be declared.

Sorry to press the point but your avatar does indicate an industry affiliation and for whatever reasons others still harbour suspicions and its best for the air to be cleared.

Much appreciated.

Chudster

[mickstv]

Hi Chudster, sorry to say but good luck trying to get the truth out of anyone, about any affiliation with detector companies. People will Lie.

[PATCHES JUNIOR]

Thanks.

Could you just clear up that you are a bona fide hobbyist. That is not a dealer, detector modder and that you do not make your living in the detector industry. No problem if you are not, it should just be declared.

Sorry to press the point but your avatar does indicate an industry affiliation and for whatever reasons others still harbour suspicions and its best for the air to be cleared.

Much appreciated.

Chudster

Chudster, as I said before I am not associated with Minelab in any way at all. I changed my avatar to Whites. Does that now mean I am hooked up with Whites? I think not. Please stop with the guessing game. WM6 has a coil pictured in his avatar that is made by a company. Ask him his hookup with a company!

[Qiaozhi]

Doug and Urbanfox,

Please have this discussion elsewhere. It has diverted from being on topic.

For instance, there is a QED thread and there are other forums.

Thanks

Chudster

It would be preferable if they had their "discussion" on another forum, rather than here on Geotech.
Geotech is focussed on the subject of treasure hunting technology, not slagging each other off and whining about the activities of a certain metal detector manufacturer.

[chudster]

Chudster, as I said before I am not associated with Minelab in any way at all. I changed my avatar to Whites. Does that now mean I am hooked up with Whites? I think not. Please stop with the guessing game. WM6 has a coil pictured in his avatar that is made by a company. Ask him his hookup with a company!

Understand that I have no malice towards or vendetta against Minelab despite them causing me much work to create a safe innovation environment for us all to work in. Minelab is not the issue for me and the Code of Conduct is not there to exclude Minelab from being involved in the Open Detector if they want to.

The issue is that you have signed up to a code of conduct that says:
"I will declare conflicts of interest with industry. If I work for or obtain my living as an employee, agent or contractor or hold any other particular allegiance to a company that sells metal detectors or their components, then I will declare that openly and preferably note that in my forum signature or another prominent place in my communications."

If you have any industry affiliation, it should be declared. You have said that you are not associated with Minelab. I take your word for that. It would be great if you could clear the air over any industry involvement and not just Minelab. That is all I have asked for- I think in all the recent posts.

The issue is that people want to be 'anonymous'. That is fine but it prevents any check of conflict of interest. That is why industry interests are important to be declared. You could instead reveal your real name but I assume that you do not wish to. Note too that if you work for a small company that would identify you, you do not need to name the company.

With respect to WM6, if and when he signs up to the Code of Conduct, I will also ask him to also clear the air given his logo as with anyone that indicates a commercial interest.

Chudster

[Midas]

Have you guys considered that if a ML employee did want to join up and contribute to this open project thingy, that they would actually be far less restricted in the help the could provide if they DID keep it secret? And if their intention is just to 'steal' ideas and not contribute then why would they bother signing up at all. After all the information is going to be there for all to see anyway.. its an OPEN project. Its probably a mistake to think that all employees of a big company are going to share the same anti-competitive ethos. A ML dissenter could become one of the most valuable contributors... especially if it was one of their patent lawyers.

BTW That patent of saving setting on turn off made me laugh... in lieu of crying. Does anyone have a link to it ? I assume that other MD manufacturers are completely ignoring it.

Midas

[chudster]

Have you guys considered that if a ML employee did want to join up and contribute to this open project thingy, that they would actually be far less restricted in the help the could provide if they DID keep it secret? And if their intention is just to 'steal' ideas and not contribute then why would they bother signing up at all. After all the information is going to be there for all to see anyway.. its an OPEN project. Its probably a mistake to think that all employees of a big company are going to share the same anti-competitive ethos. A ML dissenter could become one of the most valuable contributors... especially if it was one of their patent lawyers.

BTW That patent of saving setting on turn off made me laugh... in lieu of crying. Does anyone have a link to it ? I assume that other MD manufacturers are completely ignoring it.

Midas

Yes they could do that. They simply don't sign the code of conduct but would still need to establish trust to work closely with people.

Chudster

[chudster]

BTW That patent of saving setting on turn off made me laugh... in lieu of crying. Does anyone have a link to it ? I assume that other MD manufacturers are completely ignoring it.

Midas

If that patent is an obvious software patent, then help might be available from here:
https://www.eff.org/patent-busting

Chudster

[WM6]

Hi Chudster

I read your proposal on Document Templates Store.

Thanks for all your great efforts in this legal project matter.

But viewing those CERN form (CERN has IP contracts with his employees and with outsourcing peoples also) I cannot see how using this form as documenting store, IP of project contributor (authors of diverse proposal) can be protected. Nowhere in form is to find something like "authors name".

[chudster]

Hi Chudster

I read your proposal on Document Templates Store.

Thanks for all your great efforts in this legal project matter.

But viewing those CERN form (CERN has IP contracts with his employees and with outsourcing peoples also) I cannot see how using this form as documenting store, IP of project contributor (authors of diverse proposal) can be protected. Nowhere in form is to find something like "authors name".

Thanks for your feedback. As always, I welcome your positive questions. Yes an original author spot should be added. I'll do that on the first doc written and when it is circulated there may be other suggested format changes so I will hopefully only have to update the template once.

This one is not so much legal as technical. We need to start to decide what the 'beast' looks like.

I intend to publish a starting document soon to divide up the detector design into a modular components so we can begin working on the design. It would be better to start it with a forum discussion but I have posted to get discussion about this started (http://www.geotech1.com/forums/showt...tector-Project) but with no discussion yet I will do the bulk of the first pass on this document and provide that for comment to start the ball rolling. No matter, a more formal design approach is probably best from the start.

You should find a copyright notice early on in the template. You are right though that the originating author should be noted somewhere separate as they will be different to the originating author if a not-for-profit entity is formed. I'll look to make that change in the template. As people make changes from the originating author they should have their names noted in the changes section.

Ideally the open licences need to be decided first but that is going to have to happen in parallel with the starting discussion on what the detector looks like. I don't think we are into the hardware circuit design or software design- just design overview at the moment. We may need an entity to legally hold copyright but for the moment (at least with the first doc that I am starting) it will be me holding it on trust for the participants. I can probably do an OK job of the licences and legal stuff but I have written to a couple of international lawyers with an interest in this area hoping for some assistance for us and they have not got back yet.

If there are lawyers out there reading this forum (who don't have a conflict of interest and) who are willing to help then please contact me .

If anyone has a legal budget for me to spend on international lawyers then also get in touch

Chudster

[Prospector_Al]

Hi Pelanj,

I don't think that posting the idea on a forum is equivalent to publishing. Furthermore, patent examiners don't read posts on a forum.

Once a patent has been allowed, it's very costly to get it invalidated. If the invention is really worth it, a "pro se" patent application will establish priority and prevent any patent shark from stealing the invention. If it turns out that the idea amounts to anything, one can always turn it over to a patent attorney for prosecution...

Just my opinion,

Allan

[Davor]

There is a fresh posting of a webinar from yesterday on Patexia regarding "Defensive Publication" as means of open source IP protection:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cv6aRxYmvvg

IMHO it is the only reasonable way of protecting your ideas as they come, while not stripping you naked.

[Aziz]

Hey,

what's happened to the members of "Open Project Code of Conduct V3.0 Participants"(c)(r)(tm)?
Have you signed something, that you got forced like the three-monkeys?


^sif