The group. money and ideas

[gunthn]

I may be off base or in the wrong group but this seems to apply to what is happening here.

I have been thinking that there are so many good ideas here and some excellent work and it is amazing to watch and participate in, however one of these days some entity from the outside is going to capitalize on this. Maybe like a Honda decides to build an off road ebike. This is good, but how could the ideas and work of the members here be protected and capitalized on by the members here as each sees fit?

Is it possible that a collective commercial entity be created from an internet forum? Has this been done? The linux movement comes to mind though not truly comparable. Is it possible to apply for patents from within the groups by a shared service but in the name of its inventor? :wink:

 

[317537]

There is plenty happening in the open source E-bike area.

Whats been done here alot has been done before. Most of we do and learn was invented some time ago. The litium BMS's that are being developed are new but then again BMS isnt a new idea,

If we were to say no to free information because we are worried abourt Honda or Toyota learning something they dont already know we wouldnt learn much at all.

What would piss me off if someone patented an ES members ideas from the boards here andf sold as their own and then tried to sue anyone else from using an idea they stole from a pretty open community.

 

[liveforphysics]

We didn't create the wheel. We didn't create spoked wheels. We didn't create tires, or innertubes, or metal working processes. We didn't create batteries, controllers, motors, wire, chains, throttles, brakes, displays, connectors, bolts, fasteners, etc.

We benefit from these things because they are free and common intellectual property. Without standing on the shoulders of widespread free intellectual property, where would we be?

To hell with owning intellectual property. The whole concept is the the pathway to destroy the E-revolution.

What on earth would give any of us the right to feel as though we could claim any part of the concept of a motorized bicycle of any type or design? Chain driven electric bikes were being made by folks in the 1920s...

 

[Miles]

At least this one has lapsed
http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=WrFPAAAAEBAJ&dq=moulton+assisted

 

[317537]

We didn't create the wheel. We didn't create spoked wheels. We didn't create tires, or innertubes, or metal working processes. We didn't create batteries, controllers, motors, wire, chains, throttles, brakes, displays, connectors, bolts, fasteners, etc.

We benefit from these things because they are free and common intellectual property. Without standing on the shoulders of widespread free intellectual property, where would we be?

To hell with owning intellectual property. The whole concept is the the pathway to destroy the E-revolution.

What on earth would give any of us the right to feel as though we could claim any part of the concept of a motorized bicycle of any type or design? ...

I thought of roller blades but someone else patened it. I was only 7yo but you know if that secret went stayed in my head and alone in my head we wouldnt have roller blades either, by making stuff free for use.

No one believes that I invented roller blades anyways. I played Ice hockey for a year before I drew the roller blade design in plan and profile wheels and all to my 4th grade teacher. Whether it was her, or her uncle or someone from a different social circle, or not even my idea we all can get the experience for rock bottom price at K-mart.

 

[Miles]

Apparently, roller blades pre-date conventional roller skates

 

[317537]

Apparently, roller blades pre-date conventional roller skates

Thanks for raining on my parade

Yeah I also figured that plausible but the fantasy tasted so much sweeter, Im over it!.

And that’s the problem too, the desire to be the first over the line, or to dress a certain way, or to think of something brand new. Competitiveness is bred into us at an early age at school, We all have some serious emotional ties to these feeling as aparently it is against our older instinct to help and nurture.

 

[Miles]

Sorry

I can't help recalling the battle between Newton and Leibnitz........

 

[TylerDurden]

I can't help recalling the battle between Newton and Leibnitz........

 

[Miles]

I thought Leibnitz lost the battle but won the war

 

[recumpence]

I have invented quite a few assemblies for the RC helicopter community and never patented any of them. I have had MANY people tell me to patent my reduction unit. My answer has always been "I never invented anything new here, I merely applied one technology to another industry it was never intended for." I was also not the first to use RC motors on e-bikes. It seems like there was always someone else who did things first, though we think we invented it.

Also, I know a number of people who hold patents. They are costly to obtain and costly to defend in court. I am not a big patent/intelectual property person.

That being said, if someone invents something that truely helps humanity, that is another story.

Matt

 

[bigmoose]

What would piss me off if someone patented an ES members ideas from the boards here andf sold as their own and then tried to sue anyone else from using an idea they stole from a pretty open community.

A few years ago I had some "experience" in this arena in another technical area. My patent attorney friend assures me that any patent, if issued, can be "busted" if the "claims" have been publicly "disclosed" prior to the patent filing, because frankly, the patent should not have been issued in the first place due to prior art. He went on to say that he "busts" US patents regularly by perusing Japanese/Russian/EU publications for "prior art" disclosures that predate the US patent. He says most US folks scan US sources, but as he says: "We have a world of innovators!"

So it seems the best protection, if you want your technology to be available, is to publicly disclose it, ASAP. Perhaps a patent attorney member could clarify more precisely?

 

[TylerDurden]

A patent should only be granted if the invention has sufficiently unique features, not previously in the public domain; but the system is very leaky and patents stand until challenged ($$$).

A hub motor is not unique.
A toaster is not unique.
A hub motor with slots specifically for bread is unique.
But, now I have publicly disclosed the invention prior to filing and a patent could be vacated, if challenged.


"Is it possible to apply for patents from within the groups by a shared service but in the name of its inventor?"
Principals in the inventing process are usually listed in order of their significance to the invention.

 

[dak664]

IANAL but have had experience with patent applications. In the USA only the inventor can apply for a patent, and has to certify that it was his/her idea. Public disclosure of an idea prevents patenting by anyone else, and can be used to invalidate subsequent patent claims if mistakenly granted (which does not necessarily invalidate the entire patent). The original inventor has one year after public disclosure to apply for the patent; if he/she does not make an application then no one can. Patents can be ghost written by corporate lawyers of course, and the patent assigned to a company as part of a private contract for patent submission.

So disclosure of an idea in this forum will prevent anyone else from patenting it. But if it is a really good idea others will probably develop implementation details which could be patented, and very possibly prevent the original inventor from competing in the market without licensing those patents. This is known as the "circle and destroy" method of corporate patenting.

An invention which is not publicly disclosed but well documented (e.g. a notarized, dated drawing) allows the inventor to use the invention even if a patent is subsequently issued to someone else. If enough money is involved a cease-and-desist letter will probably arrive warning of triple damages if use is continued, but a response documenting the prior discovery will likely cause the matter to be quietly dropped for fear of losing the patent entirely to a finding of prior art.

 

[Miles]

The original inventor has one year after public disclosure to apply for the patent;

I didn't know this..... Is it a US specific thing?

 

[recumpence]

There is also an area of this that, I think, is called supercedant patent? (or something like that). The basic principal is, lets say someone invents the threaded bolt. Now, every machine ever built must pay a fee to use their bolt design in their assembly. That would get crazy expensive. However, if a machine that is more complicated than that one bolt is designed, it can be built and patented without recourse because that machine has greater single significance than the bolt alone (for its design purpose). Therefore, that entire machine supercedes the bolt patent.

Also, the one year ruling is a "Provisional Patent" and must be applied for.

Matt

 

[spinningmagnets]

20 years ago, an inventor could produce a sample device, find venture capital, and slowly develop an early-adopter market for the product. By the time the cheap knock-off reverse-engineers got their grubby hot palms on a working retail model (China, Mexico, India, etc) You were already on retail shelves to establish yourself as a quality product.

Your prices might have to come down to compete, once cheap copies began arriving in the market, but by that time you had hopefully paid off development and expansion costs and could afford to lower prices to survive. These days...

The internet is a two-edged sword, it not only allows good new developments to be group-vetted by ES, it also IMMEDIATELY exposes those developments to China. Copies sold inside China cannot be fought, and Chinese lawyers will vary the device "just enough" so that its a waste of time to even consider a legal fight for US sales.

Henry Ford did not invent the internal combustion engine, the car, or the assembly line. Many attempted to compete, but Packard, Studebaker, and Hudson (among many others) have fallen by the wayside....

When gasoline prices go up again (and they will) there will be a mad rush to buy hub-motors. Prices will tempoorarily spike up and most kits will be sold out for months...but the national economy hit wil also mean RC motor sales will be down some, and all those lovely Astro/HXT motors will be waiting patiently, and perhaps even on sale.

Aluminum mounts and adapters like Grinhill and Matt, and also this double right-side freewheel solution, brings everyone closer to viable plug-and-play RC options. I hope big companies start producing them for sale (White Industries, etc) but since these are make-able by a small shop like Matt and others, large overseas companies can't corner the market, or use a patent to crush competition.

 

[gunthn]

Wow wow wow.

It was just an idea.

So you don't like intellectual property. I don't think a patent preludes one from deciding how the idea is used and if or not it is to be compensated for. They definitely have their place. I think it is about getting the credit more than the money, but really it's a huge legal thing and way beyond the scope of this arena.

I believe I was far more interested in the idea of a common marketplace where the ideas and ultimately products that will ultimately result from much of this work can be sold to the outside world who might desire to own something that someone made here.

That can't be so bad. Can it?

 

[mclovin]

IMO this forum is mostly an incubator (not a critisism, just an observation) where ideas are hatched - or in many cases re-discovered by a new group of people - and some "products" come to fruition. As such I think that 5 or 6 businesses will (have) spin off from here as people connect, ideas are shared, trust and respect for one another is established..etc. I could envision that some small business ventures will focus on specialized frames and geared hubs while others would be focused on the motors and ESCs while others will focus on battery solutions and so on. But, I suspect that they will all follow a fairly "traditional" business structure i.e. structured as an LLC (or C or S corp), follow GAAP style accounting and so on. Maybe this is only because that's what most people know how to do things. As for me, I'm intrigued by the idea of an "open" business but I'm at a loss on how that would work out. Anyone?

Again, IMHO, if any large businesses are looking at this forum for information it's probably for market reasearch and not so much for R&D. That's because WE are the market for ebikes - and the trend setters too (for part of the world at least). On this forum you can find the "mavens" and the "connectors" and the "sales people". What's needed are some "sticky" developments (mid-drive systems?) and a way to translate that for a mass market and you got a hit. I'm sure that some larger businesses are checking in with the ES but they are not likely to alter their own agendas or B-plans based on what they find here but will more likely use what they read here as confirmation that they are on the right product path. Again, this is all just an opinion.

 

[317537]

A collective consciousness all focused on a wide range of similar goals.

Interesting how some picture ES a hive of mind type of thing and yet this establishment structure always sends shivers down your spine.

Resistance is futile, inductance is likely, impedance will be assimilated or destroyed, and capacitance is inevitable.

 

[gunthn]

I am not sure I really care what big business does or does not. If some large player goes down this road then we all benefit by the exposure of the fundamental ideas which drive this.

Can this really be called a collective. I mean we barely know each other. Don't we all have to either fly around in a ship together and refer to each other as numbers and have at least have a collective like name. We don't even have a name! :wink: ES is a board not a name.

As a sort model for future business, if something came of this which became a way for the members to make a living (as some have already) and express ideas and have fun, wouldn't this be a good thing. But more importantly could it happen?

liveforphysics:

'To hell with owning intellectual property. The whole concept is the the pathway to destroy the E-revolution.;'

Don't you work for Microsoft or was that some other MS? :wink:

 

[gerlewis]

"So disclosure of an idea in this forum will prevent anyone else from patenting it. But if it is a really good idea others will probably develop implementation details which could be patented, and very possibly prevent the original inventor from competing in the market without licensing those patents. This is known as the "circle and destroy" method of corporate patenting."

My mate works for rolls-royce and often mentions that there is a team of people whos job it is to 'ring-fence patent' ie, if someone like Lockheed Martin or PrattWhitney come up with a good idea, RR will patent every variation on that idea so that the competitors cannot develop their product properly.

In a way this impedes progress, but its not about progress, its about ££ $$

 

[gunthn]

gerlewis,

Isn't that an enormously expensive legal process that applies to the ultra high return market of turbines? If one of those manufs. gets the up on the other and gains one contract for a fighter or a Boeing jet the returns are huge and on the contrary if the other loses the costs are. My point here was what if there was a system where you post an idea that everyone agrees is yours and gives credit for and in turn they may use it with your permission tacit or otherwise. A sort of self governing patent system. Which I suppose exists here to some degree already. This led me to think what if on the outside there was a simple system to legal patent those ideas for the rest of the world. That was just an idea. Whether you like the patent system or not a simpler system would greatly benefit small inventors who wish to profit from their work and ideas. A system governed less by speculation and gambling then by implementation of ideas and just rewards.

 

[TylerDurden]

My point here was what if there was a system where you post an idea that everyone agrees is yours and gives credit for and in turn they may use it with your permission tacit or otherwise. A sort of self governing patent system. Which I suppose exists here to some degree already. This led me to think what if on the outside there was a simple system to legal patent those ideas for the rest of the world. That was just an idea. Whether you like the patent system or not a simpler system would greatly benefit small inventors who wish to profit from their work and ideas. A system governed less by speculation and gambling then by implementation of ideas and just rewards.

IP can be licensed to the public, retaining original credit:

http://creativecommons.org/