Hi John, Again you have posed an interesting question on intellectual property rights and protection. There are no easy answers. This field keeps millions of lawyers busy.
The basic principles are easy. If you create something, it is yours. No one can copy it. The copyright is yours. There is no legal requirement to apply for a copyright although doing so strengthens your claims. This applies to all intellectual creations, art work, designs, articles, presentations, software etc. This copyright applies to direct copies. The general ideas are not protected. You have put them in the public domain. Any one can use your ideas, concepts etc as long as their creation is not a copy of yours. The courts are extending this to include "look and feel" but in general you are only protected from direct copying. Patents are much more specific. A patent puts the invention in the public domain and gives you the rights to exploit the invention. A patent must be novel, and not obvious to those "skilled in the art". Patents must be applied for. It used to be first to invent got the patent but now it goes to the first to file. You get the right to practise the specific claims awarded in the patent. You must apply for the patent in every country where you are seeking patent protection. It is an expensive and difficult process. It is hard to think of a sundial invention which would warrant the effort and expense. Publications are another form of intellectual property protection. By publishing in a journal like the NASS Compendium, you put your ideas in the public domain. Now no one else can patent them. The copyright is still yours. NASS has copied the article with your permission. No one can copy your intellectual property without your permission. But don't be surprised is some one makes and sells something very similar, using some of your ideas, incorporated in their design. Roger Bailey Walking Shadow Designs N 51 W 115 At 08:31 AM 11/28/99 -0700, John Carmichael wrote: >Hello all: > >Hope all you Americans had a wonderful Thanksgiving! > >I have been having a discussion with a fellow dialist, who wishes to remain >anonymous at this point, about copyrights and patents. Maybe some of you >have also wondered about this before. Here is his dilemma : Let's say you >read an article in "The Compendium" about someone's new idea for a sundial, >and decide that you would like bring this design to life and enter into >serious production of the sundial. Now the author of the published article >only has drawings of his new sundial and presumeably no working model. You >add several innovative features of your own to the original design and work >out the manufacturing process. Now, after all this preliminary work, you >are ready to begin production, and it occurs to you that maybe you should >protect your project and efforts with a copyright or patent. But who has >the legal rights to the finished sundial, the author of the original article >or the manufacturer? > >Now I'm no lawyer, but I would assume that the original author wouldn't have >published his new design if he didn't want the sundial to be built. Now I >know that under copyright law that it's pretty much first come first served. >In other words, the first person to apply for copyright or patent >registration, regardless if he is the author or not, becomes the owner of >the invention. I have heard horror stories of people who failed to obtain a >copyright, and their ideas get stolen by someone else ( ie. the happy face >logo, or the guy who invented in-line skates). But in this case, both >parties have contributed their ideas to the final product. > >What should be done in this situation so that everybody wins and is happy >with the outcome? Have any of you been faced with this situation, and what >did you do to resolve it? > >Thanks, > >John Carmichael >Tucson Arizona > >
