|
Question: If I created a schematic of an electronic device, with the
intention of creating a buisness with three other people, with this
device, (they having slight verbal input, but not actually having any
part of creating/drawing the schematic), and they take a copy of this
schematic (.PDF file) to another person to change a little bit (work
out some bugs etc), does this contitue infringement?
THis is what happened to me. Things start getting suspicious near
the end of the design, and we both agreed that it would be better not
to go into buisness together. I then told him he's welcome to pay me
for my work, otherwise I claim copyright, and he's not to use it.
Am I correct in saying this? Even though he has a copy of the
schematic diagram, that I created, and he changes it, to 'look'
different, but most of the connections are still in the same order, is
this legal?
|
| |
| |
On Fri, 01 Jul 2005 13:56:29 -0400, "Mikal" <accclass101@hotmail.com>
wrote:
Question: If I created a schematic of an electronic device, with the
intention of creating a buisness with three other people, with this
device, (they having slight verbal input, but not actually having any
part of creating/drawing the schematic), and they take a copy of this
schematic (.PDF file) to another person to change a little bit (work
out some bugs etc), does this contitue infringement?
If I understand the situation correctly, the schematic was not the
prospective business's product, but rather the specification for the
product. If that is the case, while the schematic is probably
protected by copyright, that is not the type of protection you need.
If you try to take legal action for copyright infringement you will
raise all sorts of issues that are not really relevant to the
substance of your claim, any one of which could trip you up. For
example, your former partner could argue that the schematic was the
property of the partnership, and now is jointly owned by you and
himself, leaving each of you free to do with it as you wish.
It sounds to me like the design embodied in the schematic is a trade
secret which you created for joint use in a particular business
venture, and which neither of you has the right to use individually
without the other's permission. You are now asking your former partner
to buy out your share of the partnership's interest in this asset on
specified terms. That's a perfectly reasonable position to take, but
it has nothing to do with copyright law. If the asset were a piece of
business equipment or a liquor license, the legal principle would be
essentially the same.
Your rights, and your prospects of enforcing them, will be largely
dependent on factors that you have not even mentioned. The most
important one is: do you have a written agreement with this person,
and if so, what does it say?
I would advise taking your problem to an attorney with some experience
in business law, preferably with businesses of the type you were
proposing to form. He or she will know what questions to ask you and
will know what implications your answers have.
My email address is LLM041103 at earthlink dot net.
|
| |
| |
Mikal,
You and several friends contemplated a business venture. As part of your
contribution to the business you drew up an electronic schematic diagram.
Your partners debugged the circuits involved which resulted in some changes
to your original diagram. You believe that the changes violate your
copyright or that the final diagram is yours by copyright and hope for
confirmation of this.
You would be subject to the intellectual property laws of a country,
probably the country in which you resided when you drew up the schematic.
I'm not an expert but such diagrams are copyrightable. If you and the
business did not have a firm understanding of who owns the original diagram
then it is not clear who owns the copyright. But it is clear that the
original diagram contained flaws and that later revisions to these diagrams
were made. I don't think you have a strong claim on the revised diagrams. I
don't believe that your diagram gives you any particular rights to the
underlying circuit or it's revisions. I'd normally advise someone in your
situation to speak with a lawyer. I'm sorry but it sounds as if you own the
copyright to a diagram of a circuit which does not work well and has little
or no value.
Good luck,
Dave M.
|
| |
| |
Even though he has a copy of the
schematic diagram, that I created, and he changes it, to 'look'
different, but most of the connections are still in the same order, is
this legal?
First, have you registered the design?
Second, ultimately, it depends on what the judge says.
|
| |
| |
In article <oa3ec1hb0ce2tmjob7aolg677qhblu8khl@4ax.com>,
David Martel <marte005@earthlink.net> wrote:
You and several friends contemplated a business venture. As part of your
contribution to the business you drew up an electronic schematic diagram.
Your partners debugged the circuits involved which resulted in some changes
to your original diagram.
.. . .
I'm sorry but it sounds as if you own the
copyright to a diagram of a circuit which does not work well and has little
or no value.
But is the debugged circuit a "derivative work" of the original buggy
circuit?
Seth
|
| |
| |
You and several friends contemplated a business venture. As part of
your
contribution to the business you drew up an electronic schematic diagram.
Your partners debugged the circuits involved which resulted in some
changes
to your original diagram.
. . .
But is the debugged circuit a "derivative work" of the original buggy
circuit?
I would think that it is a derivative work but that's not germane here.
He does not claim to own the circuit, at most he owns a schematic diagram of
the circuit. He could argue perhaps that the final schematic diagram is a
derivative work of his original diagram, but to what end. Software to make
schematic drawings is ubiquitous and the drawings could easily be redone.
The trouble and expense of raising these issues may not justify going to
court. And he provides no reason to believe that he actually does own
anything. At most he owns some almost worthless diagram and that's
arguable.
Dave M.
|
| |
| |
|
