Welcome to the Forum for InventorSpot.com, the most popular invention related website in the world. Read our welcome message.
Moderators: Michelle, Scrupulous, Roger Brown, citizen
by Scrupulous » Mon Oct 29, 2007 12:11 pm
-
Scrupulous - Black Belt
- Posts: 2414
- Joined: Sun Jan 21, 2007 7:32 pm
- Location: United States
Well, that's four people so far...
Curt
Levi
Mojo
Myself
Gettin' there. Who else?
Curt
Levi
Mojo
Myself
Gettin' there. Who else?
by Levi Porter » Tue Oct 30, 2007 4:06 am
-
Levi Porter - Brown Belt
- Posts: 891
- Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 2:37 am
Scrupulous wrote: In other words, we would all need to agree to sign a joint-ownership agreement, which stipulates a unanimous vote before any IP rights would be exercised. A joint ownership agreement can be enacted at the time of filing for a patent.
I like this !
Some questions. I'll use myself as a hypothetical example where possible to strengthen points or questions. I often feel like I have to think like a jerk to stay one or two steps ahead of the rotten apples and I always think safety first. This is why you'll find me inquiring about a handful of issues that hopefully will never arise. It's just my way of looking out for us.
I may have answered some of my questions if MOJO's ideas from THIS
are the basic procedures.
I don't think it protects from teaming up on someone or collusion amongst members. Oh yeh, I thought I read and hope that there would be a good faith clause in there somewhere. If all the work performed by all members was made available to all members, then someone would have documentation to defend themselves if necessary. Sorry for maybe answering some of my own questions like this, hopefully it saves you time and is of use to others. I think the next three questions are answered as well.
Do we sign before entering the group? If so, what if I change my mind midstream and quit?
If we wait to sign at the end of brainstorming or the beginning of prosecution, what if everybody in the group wanted to kick me out. What if my contributions were sub par? No one likes to carry dead weight.
Are there provisions, clauses, or guidelines that outline procedures for quality and or contribution variations from members that would result in various percentages or credit given?
Scrupulous wrote:...I don't see anything else that would need to be established before beginning this openly.
I am assuming that some of this openness takes place in the private section?
I would also like to suggest that members may want to consider or keep in mind that this is the first run and not necessarily going to be a home run.
I offer no pessimism. I am one of those optimists that prepares for the worst.
99% of the time the worst doesn't happen, therefore I am usually happy and successful.
Sorry for drifting into personal philosophy...
Anyway, when someone in the group (most likely Scrupulous) has introductory, guideline, expectations and or a place to submit what I am able to commit and participate, please email me.
I'm really looking forward to this!
... 
This is a concept I have thought about since I was just a wee lad.
It would be fantastic if this can turn into a new model for generating successful ingenuity that simultaneously encourages others to be productively creative.
by mojo62 » Tue Oct 30, 2007 6:46 am
-
mojo62 - Black Belt
- Posts: 1101
- Joined: Tue May 08, 2007 4:54 pm
- Location: Texas
Levi,
I don't expect you to read all 7 pages (history) of this thread or 19 pages of another thread with the same topic. We previously spent countless hours trying to hash out the rules for a think tank and tried to answer everyones concerns. At times it seemed to be a frustrating process and we never really got the started. But we did come to a fairly closed consensus.
I don't want to start over with all that previous hashing out again. I would rather just work and move on it without worrying too much about who will own what. That is why I suggested that we do a project and I-Spot control the ownership. I guess that won't work either.
It does appear that we need a written agreement to sign and take it from there.
Scrup?
I don't expect you to read all 7 pages (history) of this thread or 19 pages of another thread with the same topic. We previously spent countless hours trying to hash out the rules for a think tank and tried to answer everyones concerns. At times it seemed to be a frustrating process and we never really got the started. But we did come to a fairly closed consensus.
I don't want to start over with all that previous hashing out again. I would rather just work and move on it without worrying too much about who will own what. That is why I suggested that we do a project and I-Spot control the ownership. I guess that won't work either.
It does appear that we need a written agreement to sign and take it from there.
Scrup?
by Levi Porter » Tue Oct 30, 2007 8:07 am
-
Levi Porter - Brown Belt
- Posts: 891
- Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 2:37 am
mojo62 wrote:That is why I suggested that we do a project and I-Spot control the ownership. I guess that won't work either.
I would think a simple solution is to either have a percentage of everyones share go to I-Spot or have I-Spot at least get a percentage off of the top.
After all, they have contributed by providing the birthplace for the gathering of participants and good resources. If we can't agree to collectively give them something collectively...I would find this extremely unethical. That would be like a stranger invites you and others into their house to provide an area to meet others to help with a situation. Some of the guests get together, using connections made at the strangers house, do a project together in the house where they were invited, and cuts the owner of the house that invited everybody over out of the picture !
If we do this without officially giving to I-Spot, I will be willing to give 50% of whatever I accumulate.
I-Spot has got to be included. It only seems right.
by Scrupulous » Tue Oct 30, 2007 11:04 am
-
Scrupulous - Black Belt
- Posts: 2414
- Joined: Sun Jan 21, 2007 7:32 pm
- Location: United States
Hey guys,
I like the discussion on loyalty. I too pledge allegiance to I-Spot of the United States of America.
I just need to chime in here, before this gets a chance to go squirrely.
For now, I'd like to ask everyone to stop posting until my next message goes up.
I like the discussion on loyalty. I too pledge allegiance to I-Spot of the United States of America.
I just need to chime in here, before this gets a chance to go squirrely.
For now, I'd like to ask everyone to stop posting until my next message goes up.
by Scrupulous » Tue Oct 30, 2007 12:22 pm
-
Scrupulous - Black Belt
- Posts: 2414
- Joined: Sun Jan 21, 2007 7:32 pm
- Location: United States
Levi Porter wrote:Scrupulous wrote: In other words, we would all need to agree to sign a joint-ownership agreement, which stipulates a unanimous vote before any IP rights would be exercised. A joint ownership agreement can be enacted at the time of filing for a patent.
I like this !
Some questions. I'll use myself as a hypothetical example where possible to strengthen points or questions. I often feel like I have to think like a jerk to stay one or two steps ahead of the rotten apples and I always think safety first. This is why you'll find me inquiring about a handful of issues that hopefully will never arise. It's just my way of looking out for us.
I may have answered some of my questions if MOJO's ideas from THIS
are the basic procedures.
I don't think it protects from teaming up on someone or collusion amongst members. Oh yeh, I thought I read and hope that there would be a good faith clause in there somewhere. If all the work performed by all members was made available to all members, then someone would have documentation to defend themselves if necessary. Sorry for maybe answering some of my own questions like this, hopefully it saves you time and is of use to others. I think the next three questions are answered as well.
Do we sign before entering the group? If so, what if I change my mind midstream and quit?
If we wait to sign at the end of brainstorming or the beginning of prosecution, what if everybody in the group wanted to kick me out. What if my contributions were sub par? No one likes to carry dead weight.
Are there provisions, clauses, or guidelines that outline procedures for quality and or contribution variations from members that would result in various percentages or credit given?
Scrupulous wrote:...I don't see anything else that would need to be established before beginning this openly.
I am assuming that some of this openness takes place in the private section?
I would also like to suggest that members may want to consider or keep in mind that this is the first run and not necessarily going to be a home run.
I offer no pessimism. I am one of those optimists that prepares for the worst.
99% of the time the worst doesn't happen, therefore I am usually happy and successful.
Sorry for drifting into personal philosophy...
Anyway, when someone in the group (most likely Scrupulous) has introductory, guideline, expectations and or a place to submit what I am able to commit and participate, please email me.
I'm really looking forward to this!
This is a concept I have thought about since I was just a wee lad.
It would be fantastic if this can turn into a new model for generating successful ingenuity that simultaneously encourages others to be productively creative.
That would be fantastic, Levi. Let me offer some answers to your questions, after I mention a few important points. (And don't take any of this as criticism. I like your "deutchness" tm.)
First, a group effort can be a delicate thing in the beginning. If it helps to go back and read the original litany of insults crossing in mid-air, then I would encourage anyone to do so. By now, it's more entertainment than anything else...bathroom reading, if you will. Though it could certainly be made into a book. One of the usable results of all that was the rough concept Mojo presented, which you indeed referenced. My recent "guidelines" allow for that, either immediately or down the road.
Secondly, this vision you have of "a new model for generating successful ingenuity that simultaneously encourages others to be productively creative" is also my vision. Because it can be delicate at first, the last thing you want to do is frontload it with a bunch of detail. Take a look at the rules for that Ruckus Nation contest, for example. That's a volume of material. No kid should rightly be interested in it, much less consider reading it. Any mechanism, such as a contest, that requires that much verbosity, is not a functional mechanism. This was a contest we're talking about, for crying out loud. The assumption is fairness.
There's a saying, "we'll work out the details as we go." As sloppy as it sounds, no greater things have been accomplished without that philosophy. Believe me when I tell you that simple is better. We've headed down the road of "big governmnent" and eventually realized that, for any practical consideration, it won't work for this. Besides, our mechanism is clear and straightforward: time limits and unamimous decisions. (Questions about any of this are encouraged.)
So, speaking if questions and philosophy, let me get to some of yours...
I don't think it protects from teaming up on someone or collusion amongst members.
Nothing would protect against that. Faith in each other, in the group, and in the process would be our only defense. Unanimous decisions only reinforce that. Time limits remind us that we don't have to do a darn thing, but also that the clock is always ticking.
Do we sign before entering the group? If so, what if I change my mind midstream and quit?
There's no need to sign anything for now. The power is in witnessing ideas. You can come and go as you please.
If we wait to sign at the end of brainstorming or the beginning of prosecution, what if everybody in the group wanted to kick me out. What if my contributions were sub par? No one likes to carry dead weight.
If at the end, everyone wants to kick you out, then you'll get kicked out. The beauty is that you will always be entitled to your contribution, one way or another, and whether it's part of a collaboration or not. But the need for cooperation that you will find here, is no different than it would be for anything else you do in life with others. We won't think in terms of par and sub-par, as we will be breaking new ground. Each member is simply entitled to his or her own contribution, based upon a fair method for determination.
Are there provisions, clauses, or guidelines that outline procedures for quality and or contribution variations from members that would result in various percentages or credit given?
I just outlined it a few posts earlier. That, along with something like Mojo's approach is all we need right now.
I am assuming that some of this openness takes place in the private section?
That's correct.
I would also like to suggest that members may want to consider or keep in mind that this is the first run and not necessarily going to be a home run.
Agreed. But, there's no reason not to practice success.
I offer no pessimism. I am one of those optimists that prepares for the worst.
Exactly, and despite the daunting challenges we'll face, it could not be accomplished without optimism. (It's just a theory.)
99% of the time the worst doesn't happen, therefore I am usually happy and successful.
Heh, there you go. You're in. Welcome aboard.
Last edited by Scrupulous on Wed Oct 31, 2007 10:09 am, edited 2 times in total.
by Levi Porter » Wed Oct 31, 2007 1:17 am
-
Levi Porter - Brown Belt
- Posts: 891
- Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 2:37 am
Thanks a lot for all of the detailed responses Scrupulous ! 
As usual, I agree with almost everything thing you said.
Sorry to make you work so hard.
I'll try too keep it simple.
Ready to start when everybody else is.
As usual, I agree with almost everything thing you said.
Sorry to make you work so hard.
I'll try too keep it simple.
Ready to start when everybody else is.
by Scrupulous » Wed Oct 31, 2007 10:04 am
-
Scrupulous - Black Belt
- Posts: 2414
- Joined: Sun Jan 21, 2007 7:32 pm
- Location: United States
citizen wrote:It would be nice to get this thing rolling and productive...don't forget to add me.
Yeah. I'm adding you, citizen.
I'm starting a list of people that will get access to the private forum.
So far I've got:
DV
Levi
Mojo
Scrup
MWB
citizen
KOTK
...and whoever else would like to join in the next few days. It would be good for each member to have at least 25 posts under their belt before too long. Let me know if I'm forgetting anyone...
Minnesota?
ideagirl?
A-Rob?
DannyB?
CriterionD?
DanDenney?
Grahamms?
inventoy?
Stephen?
DMISalem?
WadeSun?
...and so on.
Naturally, Michelle is always invited, and a handful of mainstays will be "grandfathered" in automatically...
Roger Brown
Road Show
Work2xl
and yes, of course you, B-b--b...
You, bbbo-bo
...
b-b-b-b-b-bb-b-b-b
...
BA-BA-BA-BA-
...
BO-BO-BO-BOBOBO
...
bbbph
...
bbbe-be-beeu
...
B-bbb-bo-beachsurferguy!
