Programmer's question. - page 6
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
Well done, Peter, working on yourself. I think this is the right point of view - if you have an idea, try to implement it, regardless of the fact that it might be stolen. All ideas are floating in the air for everybody anyway, and this way you will have a chance. If it's stolen, so it's stolen, we'll come up with a new one, let them use it.
If you use the word owner, do you think we are talking about ownership? In Russia, ownership includes 3 rights at once: to use, to possess and to dispose of (alienate). As a rule, they all belong to the organization in which the creator of the programme works. The patents are valid here. And they don't apply to computer programs, only to the functions they implement, like "A way of controlling...".
I think what was meant was copyright, which only accrues to the creator of the program. It is an inalienable personal right. The copyright on computer programs and databases in Russia is protected in the same way as the copyright on literary works. In particular, the royalties for the republishing of The Quiet Don go to Sholokhov's heirs, while the author of the work remains Sholokhov, even after his death. AP arises for the author of a computer program immediately, by virtue of its creation. It can be protected in the same way as the copyright on a book or a scientific article, discovery, idea - by publication. Including the state registration of computer programs and databases in the USSR was made by the All-Union Scientific and Technical Centre. How it is now I do not know. There was also sectorial registration, under the USSR Ministry of Education (MVSSO) there was sectorial fund for registration of algorithms and software, OFAP. It exists even now, but it became more commercial and has a different name. I think it continues to publish a journal with descriptions of registered software, databases and even algorithms. To find the address, google "Galkina Alexandra Ivanovna", she is the head of the foundation and an enthusiast in her field.
Here, I found it: http://ofernio.ru/, Galkina is still working. She publishes the electronic edition http://ofernio.ru/portal/navigator/navigator_history.php#ZAKLADKA: "Chronicles of United Foundation of Electronic Resources "Science and Education"". It publishes by results of current month the abstract information about developments in software and digital code in the field of science and education, registered in the United Foundation of Electronic Resources "Science and Education". In the late 90s they willingly took for free registration programs about anything, but what is not related to science? In addition simultaneously, free of charge and without any efforts from the side of the author the fund carried out the state registration in VNTIZ, the author received at once two registration certificates. Paper ones.
Of course, if you are involved in a common cause in the role of a programmer (or any of the others needed in the cause), you need to think about the legal basis for working together. More often than not, this legal basis is the Labour Code, an employment relationship. The programmer sits at the employer's computer in a clean room, heated and lit at the expense of the same employer, receives a salary guaranteed by the employment contract now, not after the sale of the finished product. Few people want to take on the role of that very employer and assume all the risks involved. Freelancing is also regulated by an agreement, sometimes a public offer, but the essence remains the same - all the risks are borne by the customer. The programmer sits at his computer and in his room, but the money is received for the implementation of the customer's ideas in the agreed terms of reference, and at the time, which is guaranteed by the contract. And no one will give the customer any guarantee that the money he spent will ever benefit (be recovered). So the programmer's security is much higher; in terms of security he is far from being a weak link. His work is always paid for. Only in the case of bankruptcy of the whole enterprise, which is organized by a customer, the programmer might get something less. That is usually the case.
The weakest link in a joint project is the one whose income is determined by the final result - the most risky part of the project. Look at your expenses, how much did you pay for using several versions of Windows and Microsoft Office, upgraded several times during the last 20 years? And the MS programmers have received their full salaries. Is it also worthwhile to take into account how much of their work was intellectual property and how much was routine work, and redistribute their income? It was Microsoft that took the risk, it was the company that made the profit.
Those programmers who see their work as scientifically new publish their algorithms and ideas in scientific journals. And by doing so, they protect their intellectual property copyright.
I would say that programmers get paid for their work, and the value of the customer's (employer's) idea identified by the market goes to him. Nobody pays him for his labour.
Again, thank you for the detailed information. I can see that you put a lot of personal experience and knowledge into your answer. But then again, the point of the question was different and therefore, I replied to you earlier in a somewhat abrupt manner. Sorry about that.
No need to change the subject as the discussion progresses. The word 'legal' has disappeared. Now, indeed, the point is different. You don't seem to be interested in the law.
No need to change the subject as the discussion progresses. The word 'legal' has disappeared. Now, indeed, the point is different. You don't seem to be interested in the law.
Again, a monologue ...
Sometimes I feel like I'm talking monologue too, but sometimes I'm not
On your side I see only dialogue, but Peter is very fond of himself, so you see more monologue from him.
Legislation varies from country to country and the question is essentially the same. The defect in the concept of copyright protection by means of publication occurs when the matter turns from creative works to technologies. It becomes clear that the author can't publish the technology so as not to lose the exclusivity of owning it and further monetisation of the derived products created by it. It is possible to speak of a patent, but it does not apply to software, which means that the concept of AS does not see the possibility of a purely digital technology as an object of patentability, but treats it as a creative work, which deprives the author of full protection. The issue is rather confusing and has many nuances. Thank you for your opinion.
This does not negate the essence of practical application. I would like to remind you that half of the NS are based on formulas from the 197s
That is, you have to try very hard to make sure that your idea is unique, and was not published in a newspaper 50 years ago.
Such cool ideas even in open form - there are just a ton of them. Another question is who is going to sort it all out.
Roughly speaking, if VC sees that your idea is interesting to people even before it is created (there is a community) .... then here they are huge financials for a small percentage almost entirely on your terms. (And the idea may be trivial, it may be a new kind of zip for clothes.)
And if VC sees a super cool idea (without any actual evidence that it will be interesting for the people) you can count on a crumbs of interest for about 60%)) (Even if it's a skynet).
Another matter if you have enough money to do everything