Copyright vs Patent (intellectual property)

I've written some special processes for some equipment I service at a customer's site. At the present time a competitor is going to be getting a copy of the program for this equipment.
I'm looking to protect my routines. I've taken out the one that has the greatest possibility of generating revenue (at one of the client sites it will save them over $150/yr in utility consumption).
But another one I've left in with a 'copyright notice 2007 company name here'.
How safe is this code? Can I enforce protection of the process, or do I need to go through the whole patent pending bruhaha in order to protect my rights.
This other client can not be trusted.

Russ said:

I've written some special processes for some equipment I service at a customer's site. At the present time a competitor is going to be getting a copy of the program for this equipment.
I'm looking to protect my routines. I've taken out the one that has the greatest possibility of generating revenue (at one of the client sites it will save them over $150/yr in utility consumption).
But another one I've left in with a 'copyright notice 2007 company name here'.
How safe is this code? Can I enforce protection of the process, or do I need to go through the whole patent pending bruhaha in order to protect my rights.
This other client can not be trusted.

Click to expand...

Locks only keep honest people honest.
They do not deter thieves.

I believe the same goes for patents, copyrights etc.
If these guys are thieves what makes you think they have the ethics to respect a copyright?

IF you had a copyright yes you can enforce. Do you have the money and time for lawyers and court time?

Dan Bentler

leitmotif said:

Locks only keep honest people honest.
They do not deter thieves.

I believe the same goes for patents, copyrights etc.
If these guys are thieves what makes you think they have the ethics to respect a copyright?

IF you had a copyright yes you can enforce. Do you have the money and time for lawyers and court time?

Dan Bentler

Click to expand...

Unfortunately I have neither the time nor the money to enforce the copyright. I hope that the copyright might deter them from outright taking it, but I honestly doubt it.
The one benefit is that they're a huge company, and I hope that it wouldn't bode well for them to get any negative publicity from doing something like this.
If there wasn't anything to protect the process (copyright/patent) they'd eat it up and wouldn't think twice. However the fact that there is a chance of legal issues might dissuade them. If for no other reason than the ramifications they could receive from higher ups if this occurs and they learn of it.

In my proposal I always include the notice that the material is copyrighted, and that copies of program logic will be provided only after execution of a single site license agreement. This has served well for years. If you didn't make arrangements at the beginning of the process to protect your work, or if your efforts are considered a "work for hire, it's tough to protect it. Generally if you were being paid to develop the technique you can't protect it. The rights to intelectual property depend on who was at risk during the development.

Ability to get a patent on software is limited, but it can be done. The technique must be novel, useful, and non-obvious. The last one is tough to overcome.

Note that patents and copyrights simply represent the right to sue an infringer. By themselves, as pointed out above, they can't keep someone from stealing your ideas, only give you a leg up when and if you decide to sue.

Unfortunately I don't think you have much (any) grounds for recourse here. They customer paid you to write the custom PLC application for them. In fact, I think you going back to remove key lines is pretty questionable. However, that said, I've been in your position, as I'm sure many on this forum have been. We all feel your pain and have gone to great lengths at one point or another to protect our approaches. I believe the advice Dan and Tom gave is about what your options are.

That said, I've had the opportunity to with quite a few integrators and end users alike. My first observation has been that integrators tend to hide techniques that can't be proprietary trade secrets, blowing the signifiance out of purportion (not to say that yours isn't legitimate) - things like disabling PLC communication via an OPC server in script, or ramping down the power of a device with the load. Cumon, it's like trying to patent a bubble sort. Second, if you could compile your application, it would really screw your customer, who paid for the system, in the long run. Been there, done that, with custom C applications where some jackass charged the customer literally millions then went under. Third, no offense, but I doubt your competetors give you that much credit. When you get a new customer do you carefully dissect the existing logic, taking notes? Would you really identify the clever part of the logic as the big money saver? I'm willing to bet that if you had to write a new program for their hardware you'd look through the old code, more as a memory reference, and design the thing from scratch. Your value as an integrator comes from your knowledge of the systems and ability to adapt - not a specific optimization technique that happened to save a customer money.

surferb said:

Unfortunately I don't think you have much (any) grounds for recourse here. They customer paid you to write the custom PLC application for them. In fact, I think you going back to remove key lines is pretty questionable. However, that said, I've been in your position, as I'm sure many on this forum have been. We all feel your pain and have gone to great lengths at one point or another to protect our approaches. I believe the advice Dan and Tom gave is about what your options are.

Click to expand...

I can see what you mean, however I wasn't specific with my details. Suffice to say that over the holiday I ran an experiment to see just how much utility savings could be had by trying things differently. The plant had two options in running the equipment on the weekend. Leaving it running in its regular mode would cost them $12,960/weekend. The currently used utility saving method costs the plant $3,240 per weekend. My approach would cost them $310.32/weekend. I've done all the number crunching. At minimum (not including holidays) they'd save $152,343.36/year.
Often times one of the units is left running, though there's no need for it.

That said, I've had the opportunity to with quite a few integrators and end users alike. My first observation has been that integrators tend to hide techniques that can't be proprietary trade secrets, blowing the signifiance out of purportion (not to say that yours isn't legitimate) - things like disabling PLC communication via an OPC server in script, or ramping down the power of a device with the load. Cumon, it's like trying to patent a bubble sort. Second, if you could compile your application, it would really screw your customer, who paid for the system, in the long run. Been there, done that, with custom C applications where some jackass charged the customer literally millions then went under. Third, no offense, but I doubt your competetors give you that much credit. When you get a new customer do you carefully dissect the existing logic, taking notes? Would you really identify the clever part of the logic as the big money saver? I'm willing to bet that if you had to write a new program for their hardware you'd look through the old code, more as a memory reference, and design the thing from scratch. Your value as an integrator comes from your knowledge of the systems and ability to adapt - not a specific optimization technique that happened to save a customer money.

Click to expand...

My competitor already sold one of my applications to this very client I now work for at the cost of $60,000. Another of my routines has now become a standard option because it saves the clients from hundreds to literally thousands of dollars each time it's used.
So... umm...yes... I have every right to be apprehensive.

Wow! A 96.7% savings! Almost sounds like you've invented a perpetual motion machine ;-). I here ya there! I'd be very protective about that. In fact, it sounds like it's in the patentable ideas realm.

What kind of hardware/software package are you running on? It sounds to be in your best interest to compile/encapsulate that portion.

Russ said:

I can see what you mean, however I wasn't specific with my details. Suffice to say that over the holiday I ran an experiment to see just how much utility savings could be had by trying things differently. The plant had two options in running the equipment on the weekend. Leaving it running in its regular mode would cost them $12,960/weekend. The currently used utility saving method costs the plant $3,240 per weekend. My approach would cost them $310.32/weekend. I've done all the number crunching. At minimum (not including holidays) they'd save $152,343.36/year.
Often times one of the units is left running, though there's no need for it.

My competitor already sold one of my applications to this very client I now work for at the cost of $60,000. Another of my routines has now become a standard option because it saves the clients from hundreds to literally thousands of dollars each time it's used.
So... umm...yes... I have every right to be apprehensive.

Click to expand...

Why it is just amazing how much you save when you place the on off switch in the off position.

I don't even need to calculate it. It is 100%.

Dan Bentler

A Switch couldn't be that efficient! And his program does for all but a minute and a half each hour...

leitmotif said:

Why it is just amazing how much you save when you place the on off switch in the off position.

I don't even need to calculate it. It is 100%.

Dan Bentler

Click to expand...

OP's probably got some very clever way of throwing his machine in hot standby mode. Like how Intel shuts off parts of the L2 cache in a Core 2 Duo while the thing's running. Big money to those who can do it better!

There are a few issues here that no EULA would cover.

First of all, if the customer paid for the software then it should be his & you... may not have the right to re-use it,what's good for the goose etc...

A end user licence is to deter from copying & re-selling something.

As in most plc software the end user will only want to modify it either to improve it, change the process as required or (as in a lot of cases) make it work properly.

Now there is no reason why the end user should not use another software house after all this gives competition (thats good for business so they tell me).

After all how many of you out there have modified your car?.

You don't get the manufacturer trying to sue you?.

I think the only time the software should be protected is on standard machines where the supplier has invested his own money & relies on sales of machines to recover the development costs.

In any case who can write plc code so good that no one else could not in a few hours, I agree that the application is the thing to protect not the software, there is allways someone better at it than you.

It's a sticky issue and I'm no lawyer. Sure the customer paid for the software. Do I get to demand that MS provide their source code with my $200 version of Windows? I don't see how the car analogy is relevant.

To me the question that matters is how you word your contract. Are you doing custom work on their behalf (in which case it's theirs) or are you selling them an immutable product?

In most cases in this industry you're doing the customer a great disservice to hide your proprietary routines from them. As a customer, I would probably tell you to take a hike. But if you have a "black box" component that truly saves them a lot of money - this would be worth buying with the strings attached.

Tough thing is, PLC logic isn't meant to support this kind of thing like compiled computer software does. It's pretty hard to hide your program from a customer that you provide it to.

parky said:

There are a few issues here that no EULA would cover.

First of all, if the customer paid for the software then it should be his & you... may not have the right to re-use it,what's good for the goose etc...

A end user licence is to deter from copying & re-selling something.

As in most plc software the end user will only want to modify it either to improve it, change the process as required or (as in a lot of cases) make it work properly.

Now there is no reason why the end user should not use another software house after all this gives competition (thats good for business so they tell me).

After all how many of you out there have modified your car?.

You don't get the manufacturer trying to sue you?.

I think the only time the software should be protected is on standard machines where the supplier has invested his own money & relies on sales of machines to recover the development costs.

In any case who can write plc code so good that no one else could not in a few hours, I agree that the application is the thing to protect not the software, there is allways someone better at it than you.

Click to expand...

Originally posted busurferb:

Sure the customer paid for the software. Do I get to demand that MS provide their source code with my $200 version of Windows?

Click to expand...

The difference is you didn't pay Microsoft to develop that software specifically for you nor did you absorb all the development costs. Given the information posted to this point it sounds like the OP did just that for this customer.
Had the software been pre-devoloped and the customer had no stake in the initial development then it would be more like the MS example.

Keith

I see where you're coming from, but don't see that as solid grounds for splitting hairs.

1. OP makes it sound like he's developed his "approach"/algorithm/magic formula/whatever for his entire industry. Heck, with a 90% savings who wouldn't want it?
2. Who's to say whether or not his customer "absorbed all the development costs"? Who cares? If I magically came up with an operating system that was an order of magnitude "better" than Vista, I might charge everybody for it too. Doesn't matter how much "it cost" me to make.

Like I said in the last post (and others have been alluding to), depends on how you sell it to your customer.

kamenges said:

The difference is you didn't pay Microsoft to develop that software specifically for you nor did you absorb all the development costs. Given the information posted to this point it sounds like the OP did just that for this customer.
Had the software been pre-devoloped and the customer had no stake in the initial development then it would be more like the MS example.

Keith

Click to expand...

Originally posted by surferb:
1. OP makes it sound like he's developed his "approach"/algorithm/magic formula/whatever for his entire industry. Heck, with a 90% savings who wouldn't want it?

Click to expand...

Originally posted by Russ:

I've written some special processes for some equipment I service at a customer's site.

Click to expand...

Given the line above as well as the tone in the rest of the posts it seems pretty clear this software was developed for a specific customer. It only became apparent after the fact that it would be a benefit to others. While this in and of itself doesn't mean anything it does tend to indicate that proper protections weren't put in place up front. And the legal system get REAL touchy about ex post facto. So while he may be able to get some protection for the future I think he's out of luck with the stuff that is out there right now.

Originally posted by Tom Jenkins:

Ability to get a patent on software is limited, but it can be done. The technique must be novel, useful, and non-obvious. The last one is tough to overcome.

Click to expand...

And then there's this. While the ultimate savings may not have been obvious, I think Russ would have a hard time proving his techniques were non-obvious. As others have said, no matter how you do it, turning something off to save energy is pretty straightforward.

Keith