28 October 2016
What Would You Do?
1. You have been asked to lead your company’s new competitive intelligence organization.
What would you do to ensure that members of the new organization obey applicable laws
and the company’s own ethical policies?
This may be possible by close surveillance and exams, though this may be unethical. It is very hard to make sure that your members or employees are following policy perfectly. A lot of trust must be invested into the members and employees while hoping that they have integrity.
2. You are interviewing for the role of human resources manager for a large software developer.
Over the last year, the firm has lost a number of high-level executives who left the
firm to go to work for competitors. During the course of your interview, you are asked what
measures you would put in place to reduce the potential loss of trade secrets from
executives leaving the firm. How would you respond?
I would sure hope that nondisclosure laws would apply to the execs leaving the firm so they could be held legally liable to releasing these secrets. I would also assume that if the execs leave on good terms, they would have little incentive to release those secrets to damage the company. The sole defense would be keeping these secrets confidential and limited to only essential people.
1. Clearly state three business reasons to justify why these major IT firms formed Rockstar
Obviously the first reason is money. By forming this consortium and having dedicated reverse engineers, they are able to easily hunt and find “prey” to make money from patent dues or even lawsuits. The second is anti-competition. By having these patents, they have sole discretion over them, meaning that no one else can possibly have those identical patent.
2. Although Rockstar is set up as an organization independent of its founders, what are the
possible reactions if the firm aggressively pursues an important customer or supplier of one
its founding companies? How might the customer or supplier react? How might the founder
I can say with confidence that if Rockstar went after a founding company or supplier, they would be very upset. If there is such a thing, I would define this as “patent” squatting because they are using the patents for the sole reason for someone not to have the patents without actually making products.
3. Do research to determine the current status of the Rockstar Consortium. Has it been
successful? Has it stirred up any further controversy?
Controversy is definitely present regarding Rockstar Consortium. They are considered one of the most prominent “patent trolls”. Many lawsuits have involved Rockstar, one of the notable ones involving Google.
1. Do you think that Google should have taken a different approach that would have allowed
it to avoid litigation and a lengthy delay in implementing its Book Search Library Project?
Please explain your answer.
Yes, another route would have served Google well during this time but they may not have identified another option. They could have had a settlement early on and saved 3 years of delay. Though, putting the books online for free and for purchase raise different thoughts. If the books were scanned, then able to be purchased and money goes to the publisher, I do not see a big issue and this could really boost their sales. I think Google initially thought they were going to get away with the “fair use” argument but never really did.
2. As a potential user, are you in favor of or do you oppose the Book Search Library Project?
Please explain your answer.
I am in favor of it for one large reason. For knowledge to be widely and, in some cases, forever accessible. I feel this is a very big step in the right direction and to put out footprints and history into digital content for our offspring to view and learn from.
3. Do you think that the proposed settlement gives Google an unfair advantage to
profit from creating an online service that allows people to access and search millions of
It was a settlement that both parties agreed to. Of course Google is going to profit from such a service because it will be WIDELY popular even though some will oppose. I feel it is irrelevant to consider that Google will profit when the benefits of spreading knowledge is a great thing.