Comes with being an employee of a real tech company. This is one of those cases where the Architect part of my brain (which hates software patents with a burning passion) comes into conflict with the CEO part (which recognizes that they may be unpleasant, but they're currently a requirement of being in this business at the level I intend to play).
Frankly, if I come up with what I think of as a real, defensible patentable tech (not the BS kind, but something that I actually think actually is within the spirit of the system), it borders on a failure of my responsibility to the company if I don't do something about that. That's part of the difference between a small wholly-owned "lifestyle" project and a serious, ambitious C-corp (which Querki is) -- I may be the boss, but I'm still an employee, and have to play by the rules. I don't have to be an asshole about it the way some people are, but I don't think I can ethically abdicate the issue entirely. It likely improves the company's chances of success and survival materially, and that has to be balanced against the principle of the thing.
I'd love it if the whole regime of software patents was nuked from space, so that the playing field was genuinely level, and I will continue to argue for that. But until that's true, if I'm going to claim that I'm serious about this, I have to play the damned game. Failure to do so may sound noble, but it's basically a statement of lack of seriousness -- a naive unilateral disarmament.
(Don't think I take this lightly: I've been pondering the likelihood of this for years now. It's a sucky situation, but not an issue I get to simply duck.)
*Sigh*. This is where the whole "creating a real company" thing starts to get terribly real...
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2016-04-17 11:25 pm (UTC)Frankly, if I come up with what I think of as a real, defensible patentable tech (not the BS kind, but something that I actually think actually is within the spirit of the system), it borders on a failure of my responsibility to the company if I don't do something about that. That's part of the difference between a small wholly-owned "lifestyle" project and a serious, ambitious C-corp (which Querki is) -- I may be the boss, but I'm still an employee, and have to play by the rules. I don't have to be an asshole about it the way some people are, but I don't think I can ethically abdicate the issue entirely. It likely improves the company's chances of success and survival materially, and that has to be balanced against the principle of the thing.
I'd love it if the whole regime of software patents was nuked from space, so that the playing field was genuinely level, and I will continue to argue for that. But until that's true, if I'm going to claim that I'm serious about this, I have to play the damned game. Failure to do so may sound noble, but it's basically a statement of lack of seriousness -- a naive unilateral disarmament.
(Don't think I take this lightly: I've been pondering the likelihood of this for years now. It's a sucky situation, but not an issue I get to simply duck.)
*Sigh*. This is where the whole "creating a real company" thing starts to get terribly real...