views:

377

answers:

11

Question

If you have what you think is a great idea, how do you make your idea open source and ensure that it stays that way? How do you prevent your ideas from getting stolen and patented by someone else?

Background

I recently had an idea about a programming project that I think could be revolutionary. Being a young programmer I realize that I am going to need a lot of help to make this idea come to fruition. I also realize that there are some people who might try to steal the idea and copyright it. I don't know the steps I need to take to make sure that the idea stays open source and how to protect myself from getting the idea stolen. I don't mind if a company decides to make money off of the idea but I do want to prevent one person or company having complete control over it. I have done some searching on the web but haven't found a resource yet that answers my question so I ask you for your help. Any help is greatly appreciated.

Clarification

  • I'm not looking to make money from the idea.
  • I didn't understand the difference between copyright & patent but now understand I should have asked the question using patent instead of copyright. (question changed)
  • My goal is to prevent one person or company from locking up the idea. I would love to have many people and companies catch onto the vision of the idea and run with it. (I can't imagine what today would be like if only one company had the rights to produce engines, electricity, cell phones, computers... I think you get the idea :D
+2  A: 

If you just want to make sure that no-one can patent / copyright it before you, simply write up the idea and 'publish' it. This creates prior art, and would prevent another party from patenting the idea after your publication date. You've got a better case down the line if you publish in a known / respected journal, but this can obviously be quite difficult if your idea isn't sufficiently academic or formalised. However as long as it's out on the web etc. and could be shown to have existed from when you claim then it should in theory suffice.

Bear in mind that this doesn't stop someone else from implementing your idea, they would just not be able to get any legal protection (i.e. a Patent) on it. Of course this does put your idea out in the open, so someone could come along and implement their own version before you.

Dave Rigby
Of course, you could always do your implementation and publish the writeup meer days (or even hours) before the implementation... Of course, there's always upsides to having your ideas out in the open too, like peer review and potential ideas and expansion that you'd never have thought of on your own.
Matthew Scharley
@Matthew: Indeed. I had interpreted the question along the lines that the implementation would take a significant length of time, and the OP was concerned about someone patenting his idea before he'd completed the work and published it in the form of source code. By publishing the idea (as a description of the concept) earlier, he could avoid someone doing that.
Dave Rigby
@Dave Rigby, Thank you for the quality of your response and response time. I am always amazed at the awesome answer power stack overflow has through its users. @Matthew Scharley, Just like @Dave Rigby said, I am worried about the idea being patented since I foresee the development time line as being longer than quick. ; )
Mike Grace
You can't get a patent on an idea without a detailed specification of its "system and method of operation". And your patent won't prevent other people from implementing their own versions of the concept; they just won't be able to use the same "system and method of operation" as you. For example, a "flying car" patent needs to describe how, exactly, the car will work. Subsequently other people can get their own patents for their own flying cars, as long as they use a different operational method. But you cannot patent the idea of a flying car, without specifics about how it'll work.
benjismith
+3  A: 

You can't really copyright an idea, only patent it - which (usually) has a much more rigorous acceptance criteria. However, if you preemptively publish your project with whatever code you do have written, under a license like GPL or MIT License, you are restricting others from taking outright the result of your work - that codebase and related assets, specifically, are copyrighted. This will also ensure that no one else can patent it, since a patent must be original (no prior art).

Rex M
You can copyright code, though. So, write an idea and if someone else writes the code, he has the copyrights while you have the right to patent the idea.
Workshop Alex
+1  A: 

Open source does not mean that you give away copyrights. Open Source is just a licensing method for others to use your copyrighted code. So add a copyright notice to your code and protect it. The fact that it's copyrighted doesn't mean you can't share it. You're just allowing others to use your code, according to the license you add to your code.

Workshop Alex
+1  A: 

You should ask anyone with whom you discuss the idea to sign a Non-Disclosure Agreement, and possibly some form of Product Submission Agreement. You may find, however, that many companies, particularly those who undertake their own research, are not keen to sign this type of agreement.

Dave Gamble
+3  A: 

There are two issues to address here. Patent and copyright. Ideas, and concepts can be patented before they are implemented. Copyright only applies to the actual implemented work/code.

Firstly, if you just want to prevent the idea from being patented by someone else, all you have to do is put your self in a position where you can prove "prior art", this would usual done by publishing the idea. Once an idea is published in the public domain no one else can patent it because you can demonstrate that you had the idea first. Obviously, this doesn't prevent anyone else from implementing it before you do, it just means that the idea is in the public domain so you will always be free to implement it if you decide to in the future.

If however you want to retain control of the idea yourself that is much harder. You must be the one to patent it. This very much depends on where in the world you are, but is often a long an expensive process. Depending on the jurisdiction you are in it also depends on what effect publishing first will have on your patent application. Some jurisdictions have limited windows of time between publication and patent application. If this is what you want to do you will need to talk to a patent attorney who will be able to advise you. If the idea genuinely is revolutionary, take care discussing it with anyone else before you have made the decision to either file the patent application or published to prevent others from patenting. Patent attorneys should be happy to sign some form of joint non-disclosure agreement (NDA) as part of their contract before discussing the idea.

Secondly, copyright is much easier. Copyright applies only to the actual code, not the idea. Once you have implemented the code for your idea you should publish it with a copyright and license notice. The copyright should specify yourself (or your team) as the owner(s) of the work. The license should tell other people how you are going to allow them to use your copyrighted work - when you speak of open source licenses you are probably thinking of a specific kind of license that permits free usage and modification of your copyrighted code (The two aren't necessarily the same, you can make your code open source, but still restrict its usage in your license - Microsoft have done this with lots of their code). It doesn't grant anyone else ownership. You still own the code, but depending on what you put in your license will depend how free others are to utilise the code themselves. What's important is that the copyright and license only apply to your code, not your idea. If you didn't patent the idea, anyone else is totally free to re-implement your idea themselves in their own code regardless of your copyright and license restrictions.

[Edit: I'm not a lawyer - If in doubt seek professional legal advice]

Simon P Stevens
@Simon P Stevens, Thank you for the clarification between copyright and patent. I like what you have said about open source licensing and that helps clarify what I should do. Thanks.
Mike Grace
+1  A: 

If you have serious plans to make money from this, you need to talk to an IP lawyer. If you go down the Non-Disclosure Agreement route you'll need professional help in creating the NDA document. If you go down the patent route, you'll need professional help (+ money) to prepare the patent application. And so on.

(IANAL ... and you won't find legal advice here.)

Stephen C
+4  A: 

I'm sure you have a great idea, but believe me when I say that a great idea is only a very small beginning. "Stealing" the idea means someone else has to invest the time and effort to take it to market. You still have to put that time and effort in too. If the system allowed everyone to claim ideas and prevent other people from implementing those ideas, we'd be in worse trouble than we're already in.

With the case of copyrights, you have to actually write something (a book, code, etc.) and you automatically own the copyright. The trick is to be able to prove when you wrote it. One easy way is to print it all out and mail it to yourself in a sealed envelope. Don't open it when you get it back. The postmark is a decent proof.

With the case of patents, you can't actually patent an idea without a design. You still have to put a lot of effort into figuring out how it's going to work.

Your best bet, if you really want to keep it a secret, is to not tell anyone. Then, stock up on ramen noodles, pizza, and diet soda, lock yourself in a room for 6 months, and build it. The chance that someone else can "steal" your idea if you do that is relatively slim. You'll be faster than them (the benefit of being the "little" guy) and you're more motivated to get it done first (the benefit of the ramen noodles).

If someone else is already developing it, and you're looking to stop them because "you had the idea first", well, tough luck. With these things it's almost always first-to-market that wins.

Scott Whitlock
Well said. Your real problem is someone in China or Belarus cracking your released software, and no patent or copyright will stop that.
MusiGenesis
@Scott W. I appreciate your insights and your humor. The reference to ramen noodles gave me a good laugh. ;)
Mike Grace
@MusiGenesis - Yes, that is a real problem. It's not just a "risk". If your idea is that good, the Chinese *will* take it. There's a big cultural difference there - their culture doesn't even seem to have a concept of intellectual property. The answer - just don't worry about that market. Get trademarks and use copyrights over here to protect you in this market.
Scott Whitlock
Well, we (the West) stole from China for a couple thousand years, so I guess this is just payback.
MusiGenesis
@MusiGenesis - that really has nothing to do with it. First of all, by definition, copyright infringement is not theft because it does not deprive the copyright holder of anything tangible. It infringes their "rights". The Chinese culture has never recognized such a right. The idea of controlling who can copy data is completely foreign to them. If you think about it, their point of view makes more logical sense... they're just following the natural process of taking what works and using it, or making it better. We're the ones who created an unnatural system.
Scott Whitlock
+7  A: 

I've been down this road myself, and trust me: you can end up wasting a phenomenal amount of time, energy and money trying to protect your idea. Software patents are incredibly expensive and nearly valueless, unless you want to get in the business of suing people all the time. In any event, ideas (especially the "revolutionary" kind) are cheap; there are far more good ideas floating around than there are capable, effective programmers who can bring these ideas into reality.

If your idea is good and you prove yourself capable of executing it, you'll do fine. You're better off putting your effort into that.

MusiGenesis
@MusiGenesis, Thank you very much for sharing your experience. I agree that many things could be better if more time was spent in executing it very well instead of suing others who are trying to do it also. Thanks again.
Mike Grace
@MusiGenesis - regarding your point about patents being very expensive, that's very true. I was recently talking to some IP lawyers and they mentioned that the average cost of a full software patent litigation in the US was well over $1 million. And then they laughed. Patents only make one profession wealthy, and it's not us.
Scott Whitlock
+4  A: 

As a young programmer, the greatest danger is not that someone will steal your idea. It's that no one will care about your idea. Your biggest goal ought to be to get your ideas and code -- and especially your name -- out there to get people's attention. (Not in an obnoxious way; by doing something worthy of respect.)

One of the ideas behind open source is to make it more attractive for people to work with your existing project than to "steal" it and go off on their own with a fork. Forks are a pain in the ass because you either have to keep merging in changes from the original code, or you ignore the original project and lose out on the work being done there. So it's to everyone's advantage to stay together. You want to keep it that way, as the owner of the project.

Ideally, your technology becomes popular, and as the owner/founder of the project you acquire a reputation, and a deserved position as the Big Expert on it, which will become quite valuable to you. Good luck.

Jens Alfke
@Jens Alfke, Thank you for your response and insight. I have never created or ran my own open source project yet and so I appreciate you sharing your experience.
Mike Grace
+2  A: 

The only way not to loose the idea is not to execute it. You can feel warm about having a good idea for as long as you wish before executing it. Ze Frank had one The Show about it.

Tadeusz A. Kadłubowski
+1  A: 

Good ideas are often overrated. Skype isn't the first voice-over-ip service and there were dozens with that idea before Skype. But because Skype did the execution better than everybody before them they reaped the profits.

Christian