On the right to publish ones own design/IP

Lastly, the company has ZERO obligation to provide anyone with any (internal) info. I strongly suggest you read those NDAs *very* carefully. I suspect that in essence you signed over all rights to any and all work you did when in their employ. So, if you want to publish anything, make damn sure it is DIFFERNT from anything you did while working for ANY company whereyou signed away rights. And make damn sure that you can PROVE that difference in a court of law, most expecially if it *looks* even similar to any of your work in NDA companies.

It's more likely to be a copyright issue than a patent issue.

Your contract with the company probabyl will have resulted in your assigning to them the copyright in your work, meaning that neither you, nor anyone else, has the right to copy it without their consent, which they're apparently not giving.

Sylvia.

Welcome to the real world. They have told you no, and they own it, so end of story.

That NDA most likely said anything you did while in their employ is THEIR property. You have no further right to it, apart from perhaps being attributed for it.

They can't stop you publishing it, but they can sue you for doing so. And now that they are aware of it, they probably will. And given that the company is big enouhg to have it's legal department, they will relish the opportunity to do that I'm sure.

No, they will sue you either way.

Yes, completely.

Dave.

--
---------------------------------------------
Check out my Electronics Engineering Video Blog & Podcast:
http://www.alternatezone.com/eevblog/

It's hard to tell from your writing whether or not you actually signed any IP agreements that relate to your design. You indicate above that you would respect such agreements, but you don't comment on their substance or how you feel they may (or may not) apply here. So it's hard to know. The only basis for any guessing I have here is that you want to adhere to the substance of agreements you made but also want to publish the design and this suggests to me that you feel the design wouldn't conflict given your own understanding. You wrote to them, it appears, with this understanding and were taken aback by their response to you. But that's obviously a wild guess on my part.

As I understand it, the worst case penalties related to copyright violations -- single instance -- is something between $1000 and $5000 US, the 1957 act as amended in 1994. But that is dated info, so things may be worse now. You are probably in a better position to understand the level of enforcement there.

Is it possible for you to get an informed opinion from someone who would be willing to examine what you've signed? I'd recommend that approach. It's probably unwise to take a step in a direction where the company is now aware of your desire and has launched their initial salvo in your direction. You shouldn't accept their assurances about their own position -- it's been my experience that companies are often very quick with lots of strong bluster even when they know in advance that their own positions are weak or non-existent.

Informed council is advised at this stage, if you want to pursue it further.

Jon

You sign the NDA to keep your mouth shut. Revealing to the public what you design as a custom is a dead end street. If the design is any good, you will get some sleazy company asking you to do the same design for them. The things get really messy.

Your best bet would be to try to write a paper WITH an engineer at the company that paid for the design work.

Lastly, working silicon isn't really all that novel. Well, it shouldn't be all that novel. Most papers I read just make me say WTF.

It's neither. It is an intellectual property issue, though.

Not the "copyright". *ALL* rights. It is obviously their property to do (or not) with what they wish.

"krw" " Sillier than Anyone Else "

** Correct.

The OP's former employer owns all the design ideas he generated for them while employed by them - so he cannot publish articles giving details about any of it without their permission.

Any technical publisher would be well aware of this and insist that submitted articles have such permission before publication.

** The OP may wish to re-use his CMOS circuit idea at some time with another employer.

Whether and when he is entitled to do so depends ( legally speaking) on the agreements he signed - however there are simple ways to distance himself from any such re-usage.

.... Phil

It would automatically be copyright in the UK actually due to our IP laws.

You normally sign a form assigning all rights to the company when you join them.

Graham

-- due to the hugely increased level of spam please make the obvious adjustment to my email address

** Complete bollocks.

Better go learn what kinds of things "copyright " actually covers

- d*****ad.

..... Phil

Wrong.

As well as an NDA, which is the real issue here.

Check the laws in India, and the terms of your contract. I suspect that they're close to British & therefore close to US. Take all the rest of this post as being applicable to the US, and only meaningful to you after you consult a lawyer:

The company would have specified in your NDA that you were performing "work for hire", which means that the work you did for them belongs to them.

If that's the case, and unless they failed to pay you the contracted amount, the work doesn't belong to you any more than if I did it (although it's probably better done than if I did it :-).

Next time you go to work someplace check the NDA and any non-compete agreements. It's common practice in the US for a company to try to get you to agree to give them _anything_ you develop _at all_ during your term of employment. Strictly read that means that if you're running a little start-up in your garage at the same time, they own that, too. It's also common practice in the US for such clauses to be readily stricken if you raise a stink. If the hiring manager wants you, and you won't go to work for them under that circumstance, then you need to negotiate something else (like, they own work that's directly related to their business, but not something that doesn't impact them when your garage business goes big time).

--
http://www.wescottdesign.com

They often claim, when asked, that they use broad language but don't "mean" to include things you do at home that are _unrelated_ to their area of business. Even that verbal assurance isn't assuring as who is to say, from moment to moment, what business they care about and what they don't? It's up to them what they want to do, unless you change the language.

I remember seeing such language more than 30 years ago, working at Tektronix. I signed it then, but it never was an issue. Once it became something I later cared about, about 4 years later, I never signed another blanket clause. I always asked for it to be modified and, without exception, it has been. Sometimes, just striking it out completely (obviously my preference.)

Not every business is going to get all possessive, even with such a clause. I think part of it is that you are right that sweeping clauses like that may get modified or removed, if pressed. Part of it is that business managers are sometimes reasonable folks.

It is good to ask for it to read as you want it to read, though, before signing. Or just get rid of it.

(Though the laws may be similar, as you suggest, I did do a search on copyright penalties in India and it seems as though they are far less than they may be in the US. I'm not sure what that means for a signed contractual violation, though, as well. That may be yet another matter.)

Jon

It's a specific aspect of *UK* Law. Namely the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act. Circuit diagrams, PCB layouts etc are all considered 'works of art' under UK Law.

Look it up and how Mackie tried to use it in the UK Legal system to sue Behringer, which didn't work because the product wasn't designed in the UK but if it HAD been ... Behringer would have lost the case.

Don't bother contradicting me, I KNOW this stuff.

We have specific clauses to include schematics and PCBs for example as 'works of art'. Has been used in a test case.

Types of work covered

1. Artistic

Photography, painting, architecture, technical drawings/diagrams, maps, logos, etc.

NOTE : Technical

Graham

-- due to the hugely increased level of spam please make the obvious adjustment to my email address

Correct. We have specific clauses to include schematics and PCBs for example as 'works of art'. Has been used in a test case.

Types of work covered

1. Artistic

Photography, painting, architecture, technical drawings/diagrams, maps, logos, etc.

NOTE : Technical

Also true. Assuming he did sign one. I don't recall signing an NDA at an employer, just IP.

Graham

-- due to the hugely increased level of spam please make the obvious adjustment to my email address

He could always ask their legal guys to provide copies of the NDAs etc he has signed. If they overlooked it, he's in luck.

Graham

-- due to the hugely increased level of spam please make the obvious adjustment to my email address

Since he wrote that they ignored him when he became conciliatory, he may need to be a bit more aggressive in order to get a response.

Something like, "Unless you can provide me with a copy of a signed NDA from me barring me from publishing my design within 60 days, I intend on moving forward with publication."

Give them a reasonable timeline. If they don't respond with the document, there may be a valid argument available that an admission on their part took place as a result of their failure to respond. Maybe.

But if he only speaks from a tone of contrition, they may just continue to ignore him.

Jon

&

ive

n t u

I'm pretty sure those non-compete clauses are not enforceable.

I had a unique situation where I was doing contract work, but a company wanted to hire me as an employee. We finally settled on a drop dead date for the contracts. So I was doing work for two of their competitors, which I fully divulged.

Right. You're wrong.

Of course. However, schematic circuit.

Idiot. It is *NOT* a copyright issue. He's not trying to publish the schematic as drawn.

Dumb Donkey that you are, you likely didn't read what you signed.

-- snip --

My take on that is that while "they" may not care, whoever buys "them" when they drive the business into the ground will. Contracts aren't for when things are all rosy between you and the customer -- they're for when things get sticky and unfriendly.

--
http://www.wescottdesign.com