protecting Crows IP

[The Crows Truth]

I call upon some thoughts (inc the more intellectual sorts) on our board to help me with this one......

The Crows have seemingly developed some league leading 'scientific' processes in a number of areas since the Messiah Part II came on down. Training, fitness and recovery, monitoring of training/games and feedback via new meaningful stats etc

Now I may not be Einsteins youngest but without being able to 'patent' or 'trademark' such things above is it only going to be a SHORT TERM ADVANTAGE. Until other clubs catch up - or at least the ones that can afford some/all.

How can/do we protect such 'Crows IP'. I assume Assistant coaches can walk out anytime they want using Rest Covenant grounds - thus taking many of our secrets away

I suppose its just a part of footy that someone leads the way with development and then the rest try and catch up. I suppose you just need to stay ahead of the pack as time goes on...

thoughta?

 

[RogerRabbit69]

I suppose its just a part of footy that someone leads the way with development and then the rest try and catch up. I suppose you just need to stay ahead of the pack as time goes on...

That pretty much sums it up. Sweet FA you can do about it. It's extremely difficult to protect intellectual property in much more corporate environments, let alone in the sporting arena.

 

[Crow-mo]

you can IP technology, you can't protect the application of it.

we're using it in a certain way, which I think is undeniably part of our success, but we haven't "invented" anything.

Our biggest protection is all the basketcase clubs who can't afford their rookie list players, let alone all this sort of stuff.

 

[Stiffy_18]

Its not just part of footy, its just part of science in general. You just keep going that extra step to get ahead of the oposition.

We can't stop these things from leaking out. Craigy gets a lot of people involved and its pretty hard to get all those people to be confidential. Its just life in general. If company A does things really well, company B will try to pinch one or more of company A's employees to find out what the secret is.

The beauty of all this is that you still need strong bain trust to take advantage of what technology gets to offer and IMHO, Craig is certainly up there. He is a very astute man in a lot of areas and I would dearly love to have a beer with him and have a chat about number of areas (science in particular).

We will continue to exploit those things as much as we can. This is the area where AFL can't make everyone tread the same line. Thay can introduce drafts and salary cap but rich clubs will still get better and the poor clubs will get poorer.

But being rich doesn't guarantee you will take the best possible advantage of these things. Matty Lloyd said a few weeks back on 3AW that we are miles away from anyone else in terms of what we do off the field. Mike Sheahan (sp?) said something aling the lines "but you have the finances to do it". Yes we do but we are miles behind was Lloyd's answer.

The point I am trying to make, is you can have access to all these things but if you don't know how to use it, then it becomes useless. As a scientist myself (different field to Craigy), I find Craigy fascinating. He has a real ability to really analyse everything with such precision and with such clarity that he very rarely makes a mistake. Everyone can collect data but not everyone can interpret it and this is where our strength lies. Craigy he a top notch scientist but he has also surrounded himself with some fantastic analytical brain power. He has seeked expertise from people who wouldn't know the first thing about football but they are strong in areas of research and Craigy can tap into those qualities to get what he is after. The man is a sponge, he absorbs everything, analyses what he has gathered and then executes it to perfection.

 

[rayven]

I call upon some thoughts (inc the more intellectual sorts) on our board to help me with this one......

I know I dont fit this criteria but I cant help replying.

The Crows have seemingly developed some league leading 'scientific' processes in a number of areas since the Messiah Part II came on down. Training, fitness and recovery, monitoring of training/games and feedback via new meaningful stats etc

Nothing that I know has been developed its only been applied to our code from the research and development the once heavily financed AIS did to get olympic results.

Now I may not be Einsteins youngest but without being able to 'patent' or 'trademark' such things above is it only going to be a SHORT TERM ADVANTAGE. Until other clubs catch up - or at least the ones that can afford some/all.

Cant think of anyone who is in the unique postion Craig was in,first he was always coaching material,secondly he branched out into the AIS and gained knowlage and a network of experts in world competitive sport and he has now combined the two.

How can/do we protect such 'Crows IP'. I assume Assistant coaches can walk out anytime they want using Rest Covenant grounds - thus taking many of our secrets away

Not much we can do if they want a senior role,but as Craig himself said about players returning to there own state,its up to us to provide the right enviorement at our club,one which they dont want to leave and they enjoy.

I suppose its just a part of footy that someone leads the way with development and then the rest try and catch up. I suppose you just need to stay ahead of the pack as time goes on...

If what we are doing is ground breaking in AFL and others follow suit,they need to be pretty smart cookies to apply it like we are,(Stiffy alluded to that)

 

[macca23]

I heard Craig talking on this very topic, and he made the comment that all clubs copy other clubs that do things successfully that they aren't doing.

But he went on to say that nothing is static in this world, including sports science, and it was his job to keep looking for better ways to do things, no matter what sport you might draw that from.

Craig is a trend-setter, not a follower. He'll always be leading the pack.

 

[FCAGJAT]

When anything evolves it's a matter of adapting to those changes. Craig is a master at that. Footy is evolving so quickly and the injuries being sustained by players these days are increasing exponentially. It's great for the crows to have a coach that's so astute about maintaining player's health and managing injuries and keeping away the long term effects of those injuries to prolong individual careers.

Whilst Aussie Rules remains at a constant state of change, other clubs will have to play catch-up to employ the methods currently used by our club to manage our players, and as macca23 said, we just need to stay ahead.

 

[ok.crows]

The beauty of all this is that you still need strong bain trust to take advantage of what technology gets to offer and IMHO, Craig is certainly up there. He is a very astute man in a lot of areas and I would dearly love to have a beer with him and have a chat about number of areas (science in particular).

...

The point I am trying to make, is you can have access to all these things but if you don't know how to use it, then it becomes useless. As a scientist myself (different field to Craigy), I find Craigy fascinating. He has a real ability to really analyse everything with such precision and with such clarity that he very rarely makes a mistake. Everyone can collect data but not everyone can interpret it and this is where our strength lies.

There are actually three major processes involved here, it seems to me.

First, you have to decide on what data is relevant, and how to go about collecting it, and then actually collect it accurately.

Second, once you have the data, you have to analyse it correctly, to properly discern what it really means.

Finally, you have to sysnthesise a whole raft of things to take advantage of what you learned from your analysis of the collected data. You have to work out training and exercise schedules (even diet, I suppose), travel arrangements, team structure and gameplans, tactics & strategies ... all sorts of things to best take advantage of what you know. You have to fit (or transform if you will) what you found out into a means of getting the side (taking into account the players you actually have) playing footy in a way (or style) to take advantage of it.

No wonder Craig calls it more of an art than science, I can't see a lot of room for applying true scientific method here.

I also cannot see any member of the Crows coaching staff (other than perhaps Craig himself) just walking out the door with a "magic recipie" for all of this and taking it to another club. At best they could explain the data collection methods, what data was collected, and perhaps they might be able to identify some of the findings of the analysis, and some of the tactics and strategies that the Crows decided were applicable to the Crows playing group.

 

[Port01]

You'd have to prove that methodologies or actual equipment were invented by the crows and not used anywhere else in the world previously. I'd suggest that would extremely difficult, as it probably isn't true, lots of (probably all) the crows regime would have been built on other work by others perviously.

 

[ok.crows]

You'd have to prove that methodologies or actual equipment were invented by the crows and not used anywhere else in the world previously. I'd suggest that would extremely difficult, as it probably isn't true, lots of (probably all) the crows regime would have been built on other work by others perviously.

If we accept that there are 3 processes (collect data, analyse data, formulate training/gameplan to take advantage), then none of those processes are patentable by virtue of not being anything new. Surely there is protectable IP however in the actual data collected, in the conclusions of the analysis and in the ways those conclusions are transformed into training regimes/gameplan(s)/tactics?

 

[Port01]

If we accept that there are 3 processes (collect data, analyse data, formulate training/gameplan to take advantage), then none of those processes are patentable by virtue of not being anything new. Surely there is protectable IP however in the actual data collected, in the conclusions of the analysis and in the ways those conclusions are transformed into training regimes/gameplan(s)/tactics?

You could probably patent a method of collecting data, but not the data itself. However most, probably all, of the methods the crows use in collecting were not invented by them. The data they can simply choose to not share, other clubs can use the same methods to get their own data if they want.

As far as conclusions go you are just interpreting data, it isn't something that is patentable nor can you prevent anyone else from collecting their own data and making their own conclusions. All you can do is not share your conclusions.

You certainly can't protect gameplans or tactics, 100% of them have been tried before in some way or form, there isn't anything new.

All the crows can do is have employees sign a nondisclosure agreement as part of their contract, the same way in which other companies protect sensitive information. I know quite a bit that I am not allowed to tell future employers. It would have to be a very carefully worded contract though.

Disclaimer: I am not an IP lawyer!, but patenting or trademarking these things would have been done before if it was possible. NDA's are quite common in business these days though. you can't prevent someone from observing things that you have observed however, only the method in collecting, which isnt crows IP.

 

[ok.crows]

You could probably patent a method of collecting data, but not the data itself. However most, probably all, of the methods the crows use in collecting were not invented by them. The data they can simply choose to not share, other clubs can use the same methods to get their own data if they want.

The data itself would be protectable under copyright, not patent. There a four (4) types of IP protection: copyright, patent, trade secret and trademark.

As far as conclusions go you are just interpreting data, it isn't something that is patentable nor can you prevent anyone else from collecting their own data and making their own conclusions. All you can do is not share your conclusions.

The act of not sharing your conclusions comes under "trade secret". The laws of IP regarding trade secrets should allow the Crows to stipulate that any current staff member of the Crows is not allowed to divulge these secrets, under large financial penalty. This is normally formalised by getting people to sign a document called a "non-disclosure agreement".

You certainly can't protect gameplans or tactics, 100% of them have been tried before in some way or form, there isn't anything new.

All trade secrets. All protectable via NDAs.

All the crows can do is have employees sign a nondisclosure agreement as part of their contract, the same way in which other companies protect sensitive information. I know quite a bit that I am not allowed to tell future employers. It would have to be a very carefully worded contract though.

Yes. Agree.

Disclaimer: I am not an IP lawyer!, but patenting or trademarking these things would have been done before if it was possible. NDA's are quite common in business these days though. you can't prevent someone from observing things that you have observed however, only the method in collecting, which isnt crows IP.

Type of data to be collected: trade secret, NDA applies.
Actual data (numbers): copyright could apply.
Method of collecting data: trade secret, NDA applies.
Results of analysis: trade secret, NDA applies.
Application of analysis to training methods, gameplans etc: trade secret, NDA applies.

Disclaimer: I am not an IP lawyer either! In fact, I am not any sort of lawyer.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

A patent is only granted for any device, substance, method or process which is new, inventive and useful. It must meet all 3 criteria. A method or process usually involves a machine, manufacture, or composition of matter. So unless the Crows have built a machine or developed a new drug it can't get a patent.

You cannot patent artistic creations, mathematical models, plans, schemes or other purely mental processes. Although you can be granted a patent for an algorithm. Has Craigy come up with a you beaut algorithm to set up your defence?

My knowledge of trademark law is rusty but I don't there is anything to trademark.

TCT, I think what you are really driving at is copyright law. The Crows can only protect their IP through the documentation of their methodologies and the results obtained from their processes. It is this documentation that will be protected.

The only sporting analogy I can think of, is the protection of their IP by SOCOG before and after the 2000 Olympics. Prior to the Sydney Olympics, the IOC and various Organising Committees of Olympic cities, never really protected their IP and never produced manuals etc of the work done to put on the Olympics. This meant future bidding/victorious cities couldn't get a leg up on staging the games. From the moment Sydney won the games they started documenting all their processes.

In the end SOCOG sold their IP to the IOC for $5m and to Salt Lake City and Athens. I'm pretty sure they have also sold their IP to some bidding cities and Bejing.

Whether any footy club can do what SOCOG did is questionable.

 

[ok.crows]

You cannot patent artistic creations, mathematical models, plans, schemes or other purely mental processes.

Agreed. Patents do not apply here, as far as I can tell.

My knowledge of trademark law is rusty but I don't there is anything to trademark.

The Crows trademark appears on the top left-hand corner of this page: http://afc.com.au

The law in regard to this mark would be that you are not allowed to use this mark on any product without the permission of the trademark owner (I think that is actually the AFL, not the AFC). If you use it you must apply for permission. If you use it on a product for sale, then getting permission would involve paying some commission to the trademark owner.

The Crows can only protect their IP through the documentation of their methodologies and the results obtained from their processes. It is this documentation that will be protected.

Copyright is protection for the expression of an idea. You do not get any protection for the idea itself under copyright, only for the expression. In this case, only the actual data that the Crows collect ie the results obtained from their processes (as far as i can see) could be protected via copyright. One could not protect the methodologies employed using copyright, as far as I can tell.

Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer. I do however generate IP of my own on occasions.

 

[The Crows Truth]

This is from someone who is legally qualified - but not an IP specialist


The usual (legal) ways to protect IP are through confidentiality and to a lesser extent restraint clauses which should be in the contracts signed by assistant coaches and other relevant staff, but even these are limited with regard to the protection they offer. There is no way to prevent someone using the knowledge that they have gained in their employment with one employer with another employer. You cannot restrain someone from practicing their trade or profession in the most effective way possible.

Another more onerous and complex way is to patent for examples management processes and/or systems. Presumably this could apply to sports in the same way as business uses patents to protect its processes. Again though this is a complex are because it is possible to vary these things in a way that makes it difficult to prove that they were derived from the original.

Of course the most effective way is the non-legal way – keep the insiders happy so that they don’t want to leave and take the trade secrets with them…

 

[ok.crows]

This is from someone who is legally qualified - but not an IP specialist


The usual (legal) ways to protect IP are through confidentiality and to a lesser extent restraint clauses which should be in the contracts signed by assistant coaches and other relevant staff, but even these are limited with regard to the protection they offer. There is no way to prevent someone using the knowledge that they have gained in their employment with one employer with another employer. You cannot restrain someone from practicing their trade or profession in the most effective way possible.

Another more onerous and complex way is to patent for examples management processes and/or systems. Presumably this could apply to sports in the same way as business uses patents to protect its processes. Again though this is a complex are because it is possible to vary these things in a way that makes it difficult to prove that they were derived from the original.

Of course the most effective way is the non-legal way – keep the insiders happy so that they don’t want to leave and take the trade secrets with them…

A non-disclosure agreement is essentially an agreement signed by employees which identifies that certain bits of information and certain processes are considered by their employer to be trade secrets. The NDA is the employer and the employee agreeing on what information is trade secret.

If an employee signs an NDA, then leaves and reveals to a competitior any information that is identified in the NDA as a trade secret, then trade secret laws apply. I don't think the club can do anything to recover the secret (spilt milk), but they can extract (under trade secret laws) severe financial recompense (as I understand it) from any individual who divulged the information.

This should be sufficient deterrent for having even disgruntled ex-employees from revealing anything that was mentioned in the NDA.

 

[Crow-mo]

A non-disclosure agreement is essentially an agreement signed by employees which identifies that certain bits of information and certain processes are considered by their employer to be trade secrets. The NDA is the employer and the employee agreeing on what information is trade secret.

If an employee signs an NDA, then leaves and reveals to a competitior any information that is identified in the NDA as a trade secret, then trade secret laws apply. I don't think the club can do anything to recover the secret (spilt milk), but they can extract (under trade secret laws) severe financial recompense (as I understand it) from any individual who divulged the information.

This should be sufficient deterrent for having even disgruntled ex-employees from revealing anything that was mentioned in the NDA.

that's all fine and theoretical, but in real life it doesn't work that way. The opinion of TCT lawyer friend is spot on. you can't stop people applying what they know, and realistically you probably wouldn't even try.

 

[Arsene Wenger]

exactly right - im only recently admitted and working but I work in IP and TCT is pretty much spot on from where i see it. It is very difficult to protect such things as training methods as suggested. Interesting topic though..

 

[FCAGJAT]

I hope Neil Craig stays with us for a very long time! It would be a total shame if we lost the kind of knowledge he provides for our club. There's no one I could imagine that would remotely come close to replacing his position!

 

[tribey]

I hope Neil Craig stays with us for a very long time!

Just so long as he never entertains the thought of bringing in Gary Neiwand as waterboy.

 

[The Crows Truth]

Just so long as he never entertains the thought of bringing in Gary Neiwand as waterboy.

very good