Comments on: Chalkbot Vs GraffitiWriter

By: ToolBoy

ToolBoy — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 18:24:27 +0000

alright, that was a crap link I just posted. it was sears getting the original decision overturned. in the end sears paid out $8 million.

By: ToolBoy

ToolBoy — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 18:20:27 +0000

@hackius: Not saying that the patent system is a good one – it does more to protect the big guys than the little guys but it’s a bit strong to say everybody ignores these laws. Here is the most famous david v. Goliath cases: http://cases.justia.com/us-court-of-appeals/F2/697/796/11115/
Guy sued Sears near blind for stealing the idea for the little button on the back of socket wrenches. Intermittent wipers is another famous case. Many others…

The hacking community by it’s name and nature steals ideas and IP from companies. Seems a little hypocritical to boohoo every time they use an idea we publish into the public domain.

Whatevs, my $.02.

By: bob

bob — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 14:15:12 +0000

call the waaaaaaaaaaaambulance!

either its open or its not. you can’t give your ideas away freely and then start whining when someone uses one.

maybe this will give these ‘anti-corporate’ muppets the hint that IP protections arn’t just about making money

By: anonymous

anonymous — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 13:18:45 +0000

So let me get this straight. It’s ok for open source projects to copy and emulate ideas of corporations, but not the other way around?

By: Blip

Blip — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 12:46:47 +0000

So what. It writes stuff on the ground. It doesn’t feed starving masses or do anything amazingly useful to anyone other than, say a shoeanjufacturer seeking new advertising spaces.

By: miked

miked — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 08:05:43 +0000

Good for him for getting paid to hack!

By: Stunmonkey

Stunmonkey — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 23:53:30 +0000

why don’t you just take it to the logical conclusion, and the one that most artists afraid of ’selling out’ choose to follow; Simply do nothing, and create nothing but whiney noises.

If you create something to make the world better, a corporation might use it, so just don’t do it.
If you do anything to make enough money to keep the lights on and you creating, you are selling out.

The only way to be true is to do nothing at all. Besides, its not laziness – its >the man< keeping you down, right?

By: cde

cde — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 23:24:01 +0000

@ Misha: Wow you are dumb. That is not even the same thing. One, you paid for the toaster. Two, you are not taking their toaster, copying it, then selling it as a new toaster.

By: Hackius

Hackius — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 21:32:00 +0000

@Caleb: You’re right you put that better than I did.

By: misha

misha — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 20:08:08 +0000

if you complain about companies using your stuff then you have no right to use company’s stuff. If you take parts out of a toaster, to put into your roomba, you are violating the intention of each of those companys’ products just like they are violating yours. Unless you buy all your components new, stfu

By: oddjobzombie

oddjobzombie — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 20:02:20 +0000

This discussion exemplifies the problems with corporatization of ideas and the societal conditioning that trains people to sell them.
Creators are often motivated by profit and not the joy of creation. Commodifying ideas cheapens and objectifies the creative process. Part of the inherent joy of hacking is that an idea or product is made to fulfill a purpose or demonstrate a process that is useful and interesting, not just marketable and profitable.
Does a creator have a right to sell an idea? Of course.
Personally, I think it’s unfortunate that someone creative sold out to a corporation, and it’s especially ironic that someone protesting the militarization of robots is okay with using them to promote a company that has a history of using sweatshops and still contracts with factories that utilize questionable labor practices.

By: James

James — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 18:36:26 +0000

caleb – same occurs with the majority of Universities/Colleges – any student, undergraduate, postgraduate, or even staff have to accept the IP goes to the Uni who will share part of the profits. I dont know about other places, but the Uni I’ve worked in that did this offered 50% of profits and would actually create and run the spin-off company/patents etc required to make the cash. Seems fair to me. My current workplace lets you keep your IP but will help you commercialise the work for a percentage of the cash. They have warned us in several seminars that it is often pointless patenting anything as the cost of challenging it is prohibitive, and thats coming from world-renowned institutions.

@marshallh – no, it looks to me like some people getting upset on behalf of someone who made cash off it.

By: Insipid Melon

Insipid Melon — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 18:22:32 +0000

We in the open source committee put an awful lot of effort into trying to get corporations to recognize, use, and support open source software. It’s interesting to have such an opposing view on hardware, especially given that (a) it was just an implementation, it’s not like they were selling the machines and (b) a great many ‘hacks’ are DIY versions of commercial equipment.

I think it’s great to have as many open ideas in hardware as possible. It’s a boon to consumers such as you and I as well (as the economy in general) whenever an industry cost is avoided, and enhances the overall state of technology. If you are only willing to develop things that you will have a monopoly over, then that is what patents are for. But patents are certainly not in the spirit of things.

By: Stunmonkey

Stunmonkey — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 17:31:33 +0000

Another agreement with jeremy.

On a side note, I wouldn’t even be too sure the original guys even ’sold out’. even if distasteful to the artistic sensibility, one occasional project for a big dumb corp with deep pockets will pay way more than enough to be able to go back to the lab and work on new stuff uninterrupted for another year or two, even expand the lab and its influence, instead of closing it down.
what they did to help nike is infinitely small in the overall scope of nike. What they likely got back could have saved or expanded their whole organization and its influence.

By: Caleb Kraft

Caleb Kraft — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 17:14:43 +0000

on a side note, there is a big issue in the patent system amongst engineers. Often the company you work for owns majority rights to your patents. You watch them make money off of them, you only get your name on it. While this may seem fair for work related patents, a lot of them can take ANY idea that was created during your employment… that’s insane.