Main > Forum/Website Discussion
How much of any of this is our individual IP?
horizon:
--- Quote ---In order to qualify for copyright protection, a work must be original to the author. To be original, the work:
Must have been independently created by the author rather than being copied from other work(s) and
Must have at least a minimal degree of creativity
--- End quote ---
Everything I've been reading essentially states that you must take some form of action to protect intellectual property. And as far as IP goes, it needs to be done, essentially, by yourself, and independent of "just adding on to an existing idea".
Then I found this:
--- Quote ---Intellectual property rights protect your right to use your original creation, but don't protect the idea itself. Often, claiming your rights requires giving your intellectual property physical form, which is what is legally protected. Lastly, some intellectual property rights last for a specific amount of time, while others can, in theory, last forever.
--- End quote ---
And this:
--- Quote ---There are four basic types of intellectual property:
Trademarks-These are distinctive words, images or sounds that identify a brand. Trademarks can identify specific goods or services or may identify the company supplying them...
Patents-A patent gives you, the inventor, the exclusive right to make, use or sell an invention. You can stop others from doing anything with your invention until the patent expires, even if you never make or sell it. There are actually three different types of patent: utility, design and plant, each protecting different types of inventions...
Copyrights-...Copyrights cover writings, music, art and software, among other things. Some copyright rights are automatic as soon as you put the work into a tangible form (written, recorded, etc.), though it's advisable to include a copyright notice when publishing these works.
Trade secrets-...examples include the KFC Colonel's secret recipe and the Coca-Cola formula.
--- End quote ---
I did edit the above quote only in order to reduce the footprint of this post. I do not believe I altered any definitions to suit my own personal stance.
My take away is, that unless you protect it, it doesn't mean anything. And I still believe that sharing ideas, music, art, writings, software, and recipes in a free, public forum, doesn't make anything specifically IP.
jennifer:
I would be of the opinion that an idea, From conception to birth is documented here among the forums, along with a date stamp, These collective think-tank ideas are property of Saint.
Vigo:
--- Quote from: jennifer on February 14, 2015, 12:45:01 am --- I would be of the opinion that an idea, From conception to birth is documented here among the forums, along with a date stamp, These collective think-tank ideas are property of Saint.
--- End quote ---
I disagree, if Saint owned the rights, then he could technically build and sell my vigolix cab designs commercially without my permission. Not that he would do that, but that would also mean that I would not have the right to build and sell my own design without his permission.
As a user of instructables, i know copyright of projects on that site is a huge factor. The default protection of a project is that you are granting others to freely build your projects, but they need to credit back to you. They also cannot pursue any commercial endeavors on it without your permission.
Honestly, though, I think the copyright jazz is neither here nor there. We are talking about whether or not someone can remove their materials. I think that is a right, but shouldn't be automatically granted. A lot of my contributions are bigger than myself, an idea on top of someone's else's idea, with other ideas on top of them. I personally don't think I should just be able to remove a brick from that wall, because it is the foundation of something greater, and I am wrecking something that now that is part of the community.
At this moment, I am thinking that maybe there should be a lock on modifying posts over 180 days old, and the ability for a moderator to override or grant rights if the user has a compelling reason for it.
jennifer:
No most likely he would not do that, But to use it as a feature in an new book, attracting new members here to the forum whatever. He could lock that whole thing down with a wave of the hand. And then it is his.... And it should be that way because it is his site.
Vigo:
I get that point. Saint doesn't feel that way, as he makes the analogy that he is the librarian here, and that is one of the reasons why I like it here. It is not self-serving at all. :cheers:
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version