Idea Versus Execution
Idea Versus Execution
I do not think an idea is a "multiplier" of execution. I think it is the equation you fuel with "money". Someone writes that equation. It is not a multiplication, necessarily. That is too simple of a metaphor to describe the process. An idea focuses raw energy and projects a resulting curve. If you want to grow a business, that curve must be parabolic and positive along the Y (time) axis while simulteanously generatring revenue along the X (profit) axis. To create a business that does this, the money must be tied to something else that is moving in the same direction (such as a trend in one or multiple categories). I think this oversimplification merely befits the predicament: people are liars and corrupt, and they like to accept the system for what it is. That's why revolutionaries come up with ideas, and douchebags in the establishment rob them blind in the name of greedy business. It fits perfectly into the bullshit corporate image and the backwards ideas of state capitalism. It's a political choice by those people, who discredit their contributers, to be scoundrels and misers. They are playing political games and benefitting off them.
You have to protect yourself in business, but reality is that is nearly impossible. In fact, even the largest corporations deal with litigation, arbitration, stolen goods, stolen ideas and crappy knock-off brands. The value of an NDA is questionable. It only establishes that a conversation took place in which you agreed to sign the NDA, it rarely includes viable evidence in the court room. So, how do you protect yourself? Secrecy is the only real weapon against intellectual property theft. The problem is that intellectual property, once it is released as a product, written about, reviewed, previewed or purchased, is the property of the world at large. Only a few protections, namely patents, trademarks and copyrights, are provided.
To dispel any myths, patents and copyrights do not protect ideas. Likewise, a trademark does not protect a logo or service mark except in certain cases. Those certain cases are the ones where you have hundreds of millions to litigate, basically suing everyone and using the legal system to extort millions in remuneration from every high school kid or soccer mom who has stolen your software or illegally downloaded your music. Ideas themselves are considered "fair game" once they are expressed either vocally or in writing. It is only implementation that matters as property. Agreements, contracts, oral contracts, implied contracts and the like are enforceable, but for the small business owner litigation is impossible to protect assets, especially software.
Patents only secure improvements, rarely original ideas. Even so, anti-trust and anti-monopoly has eroded the original intentions of patent law.
Copy-cats beware: copyright law has seen some interesting developments in the last 70 years that have dramatically altered the idea of public domain. "Fair Use", luckily, serves the newest paradigm of established monopolistic companies (like Google), so plenty has been done to allow people to cite, quote, copy and sometimes rebroadcast your intellectual property. Various TOUs and EULAs have been created to insure the company is allowed to suck ideas directly out of your brain -- because you are forced to agree to them to use their services.
Wikipedia is a prime example of how your work becomes someone else's. Facebook also had the exclusive, world-wide licensing rights (though these may have been amended by a form of 'Facebook democracy' ...) and very little work has yet to be done in understanding the complexities of HCII with respect to intellectual property. Does a company owe you money if they study you? What if you don't know you are being studied? Should software come with a warning label explaining the logs it uses? Is privacy being eroded by corporate information superhouses like Google? I think it will take some time to fully explore what the Googles of the future will do.
Trademarks, too, offer great protections if you can litigate. There are more protections for physical goods than service goods, however, with respect to software and website traffic. Trademarks serve not only as fraud-prevention measures, such as specialized listings now offered by US Customs and Border Enforcement, but also as a way for corporations to maintain their all-important public image.
This isn't how it should be -- it's not what your 2nd grade art teacher would have wanted -- but it is the way the law is structured. Remember, laws were written and enacted by rich elitists and their close friends: the shareholders and other stakeholders in private corporations. I don't think today's entrepreneur should stand for it. We deserve a world where people get what they deserve, and the person who comes up with the idea definitely deserves a piece of the action. We don't want a world where it sucks to start a company -- you know, be the person who actually pays to file the papers with their name on your idea. We don't want them to be bullied and pressured out of business right at the beginning, that would be horrible. People who lay the groundwork deserve the credit. Excluding members of a team is like political assassination. It is unfair and unethical, period. If not merely to establish the truth in history, it seems like a tremendous waste to keep the people with the really great ideas held down by some deluded bully who refuses to tell the truth over a few percentages. In fact, it is probably a weakness of character in that person which creates their perceived need to screw people to gain fame or fortune. Why would anyone expect society to benefit the most from an unoriginal thinker in charge of things, while the truly original thinker is suffocated by that same person? This has happened to a number of great intellectuals of the Web 2.0 era: myself among them. Aaron Greenspun, creator of the origins of Facebook, myself with YouTube and now Marjolein Hoekstra and Tweetmeme. We could also include the claims of Hubert Chang, but I cannot verify or vouch for that. I know that I have a similar circumstance to Hubert, where no one at the University would acknowledge the truth.
Perhaps we are just better people: those who have lost something to another so-called colleague. Our memories certainly are less selective, and we're more honest about how the world is. I'm not here to sensationalize; and I feel they shouldn't either. It's too bad people have such difficulties working together. The problem isn't new -- remember the story of Edison and Tesla. The question remains who would have been motivated to burn Tesla's laboratory, but we're pretty sure it was Edison. Even though Edison didn't invent the lightbulb, he felt a need to shout how important he was above everyone else. He meticulously crafted his public persona. What a waste. Both should have been given a fair chance. It was Edison's brash indelicacy which reflected poorly on him in the pages of history. It shows the level of civility of the truly prolific scientist Nikola Tesla.
Until humanity grows up, I think this accepted form of corporate unethical behavior will continue to hold us back and keep the truly great thinkers obscured. We can only hope the best for what happens in the future. Hopefully the movements of millions of people will one day solve this social, legal and ethical dilemma. Write your congress-person and ask for intellectual property reform.
Idea Versus Execution - To learn more about this author, visit Herb Gilliland's Website.
Like this article? Share it with your friends
"There's a cliché statement about entrepreneurship that says ideas are nothing without execution, rendering the former virtually worthless without the combination of hard work and luck that can transform unmaterialized concepts into viable businesses. Some have described ideas to be a mere multiplier of execution, which is close to how I personally think about them, and I would add that the process of getting a great product out there is a vital part of what constitutes innovation in the first place." -- Robin Wauters, TechCrunch
I do not think an idea is a "multiplier" of execution. I think it is the equation you fuel with "money". Someone writes that equation. It is not a multiplication, necessarily. That is too simple of a metaphor to describe the process. An idea focuses raw energy and projects a resulting curve. If you want to grow a business, that curve must be parabolic and positive along the Y (time) axis while simulteanously generatring revenue along the X (profit) axis. To create a business that does this, the money must be tied to something else that is moving in the same direction (such as a trend in one or multiple categories). I think this oversimplification merely befits the predicament: people are liars and corrupt, and they like to accept the system for what it is. That's why revolutionaries come up with ideas, and douchebags in the establishment rob them blind in the name of greedy business. It fits perfectly into the bullshit corporate image and the backwards ideas of state capitalism. It's a political choice by those people, who discredit their contributers, to be scoundrels and misers. They are playing political games and benefitting off them.
You have to protect yourself in business, but reality is that is nearly impossible. In fact, even the largest corporations deal with litigation, arbitration, stolen goods, stolen ideas and crappy knock-off brands. The value of an NDA is questionable. It only establishes that a conversation took place in which you agreed to sign the NDA, it rarely includes viable evidence in the court room. So, how do you protect yourself? Secrecy is the only real weapon against intellectual property theft. The problem is that intellectual property, once it is released as a product, written about, reviewed, previewed or purchased, is the property of the world at large. Only a few protections, namely patents, trademarks and copyrights, are provided.
To dispel any myths, patents and copyrights do not protect ideas. Likewise, a trademark does not protect a logo or service mark except in certain cases. Those certain cases are the ones where you have hundreds of millions to litigate, basically suing everyone and using the legal system to extort millions in remuneration from every high school kid or soccer mom who has stolen your software or illegally downloaded your music. Ideas themselves are considered "fair game" once they are expressed either vocally or in writing. It is only implementation that matters as property. Agreements, contracts, oral contracts, implied contracts and the like are enforceable, but for the small business owner litigation is impossible to protect assets, especially software.
Patents only secure improvements, rarely original ideas. Even so, anti-trust and anti-monopoly has eroded the original intentions of patent law.
Copy-cats beware: copyright law has seen some interesting developments in the last 70 years that have dramatically altered the idea of public domain. "Fair Use", luckily, serves the newest paradigm of established monopolistic companies (like Google), so plenty has been done to allow people to cite, quote, copy and sometimes rebroadcast your intellectual property. Various TOUs and EULAs have been created to insure the company is allowed to suck ideas directly out of your brain -- because you are forced to agree to them to use their services.
Wikipedia is a prime example of how your work becomes someone else's. Facebook also had the exclusive, world-wide licensing rights (though these may have been amended by a form of 'Facebook democracy' ...) and very little work has yet to be done in understanding the complexities of HCII with respect to intellectual property. Does a company owe you money if they study you? What if you don't know you are being studied? Should software come with a warning label explaining the logs it uses? Is privacy being eroded by corporate information superhouses like Google? I think it will take some time to fully explore what the Googles of the future will do.
Trademarks, too, offer great protections if you can litigate. There are more protections for physical goods than service goods, however, with respect to software and website traffic. Trademarks serve not only as fraud-prevention measures, such as specialized listings now offered by US Customs and Border Enforcement, but also as a way for corporations to maintain their all-important public image.
This isn't how it should be -- it's not what your 2nd grade art teacher would have wanted -- but it is the way the law is structured. Remember, laws were written and enacted by rich elitists and their close friends: the shareholders and other stakeholders in private corporations. I don't think today's entrepreneur should stand for it. We deserve a world where people get what they deserve, and the person who comes up with the idea definitely deserves a piece of the action. We don't want a world where it sucks to start a company -- you know, be the person who actually pays to file the papers with their name on your idea. We don't want them to be bullied and pressured out of business right at the beginning, that would be horrible. People who lay the groundwork deserve the credit. Excluding members of a team is like political assassination. It is unfair and unethical, period. If not merely to establish the truth in history, it seems like a tremendous waste to keep the people with the really great ideas held down by some deluded bully who refuses to tell the truth over a few percentages. In fact, it is probably a weakness of character in that person which creates their perceived need to screw people to gain fame or fortune. Why would anyone expect society to benefit the most from an unoriginal thinker in charge of things, while the truly original thinker is suffocated by that same person? This has happened to a number of great intellectuals of the Web 2.0 era: myself among them. Aaron Greenspun, creator of the origins of Facebook, myself with YouTube and now Marjolein Hoekstra and Tweetmeme. We could also include the claims of Hubert Chang, but I cannot verify or vouch for that. I know that I have a similar circumstance to Hubert, where no one at the University would acknowledge the truth.
Perhaps we are just better people: those who have lost something to another so-called colleague. Our memories certainly are less selective, and we're more honest about how the world is. I'm not here to sensationalize; and I feel they shouldn't either. It's too bad people have such difficulties working together. The problem isn't new -- remember the story of Edison and Tesla. The question remains who would have been motivated to burn Tesla's laboratory, but we're pretty sure it was Edison. Even though Edison didn't invent the lightbulb, he felt a need to shout how important he was above everyone else. He meticulously crafted his public persona. What a waste. Both should have been given a fair chance. It was Edison's brash indelicacy which reflected poorly on him in the pages of history. It shows the level of civility of the truly prolific scientist Nikola Tesla.
Until humanity grows up, I think this accepted form of corporate unethical behavior will continue to hold us back and keep the truly great thinkers obscured. We can only hope the best for what happens in the future. Hopefully the movements of millions of people will one day solve this social, legal and ethical dilemma. Write your congress-person and ask for intellectual property reform.
Idea Versus Execution - To learn more about this author, visit Herb Gilliland's Website.
Like this article? Share it with your friends
 | |
 |
No article feedback found. |
| |
Leave Your Feedback |
 | |
| |||
Kim CastleWith nearly two decades in the advertising and design business, with clients like Domino's Pizza, General Motors, Direct TV, Pedigree, Wolfgang Puck, Higher Octave Music, Hollywood Celebrity Products, Disney, and Paramount, as well as thousands of entrepreneurs around the world define, structure, communicate, and position their business for greater profits, BrandU(R) co-creators Kim Castle and W. Vito Montone discovered that entrepreneurs could experience the same power that big brands command for a fraction of the cost with the world's only process-based results-drive Integral approach to business creation. BrandU(R) is helping entrepreneurs grow with the power of extreme clarity from idea...to brand...to market(TM) and helping one million entrepreneurs become successful and whole so that they can make a difference in the world. Are you one of them? If you want to experience clarity all the way to the bank(TM), get started now at http://www.brandu.com. - Visit Kim Castle's Website |
|||
|
To learn more about the Evan Elite Author Program please contact us. | |||
 | |
|  |
Subscribe to Herb's articles
 | |
|
|  |
 | |
|
| |
 | |||||||
|
 | ||
 |
||
 |
||
 |
||
|
| ||
 |
| Have you written articles that would be of value to entrepreneurs? Become an expert on our site by publishing them! Expose yourself to a wide audience, drive more traffic to your website and get more sales! Click Here for details. |
|
|
 |
| Modeling the Masters: Learn the true secrets behind Walt Disney's business success factors & grow your company! Video produced by Phanta Media |
|
|
 |
"Learn straight from Evan how you can Make a Full Time Income (And More) from a Website"
Click Here To Learn More |
|
|
|
|
Get advice & tips from famous business owners, new articles by entrepreneur experts, my latest website updates, & special sneak peaks at what's to come!
|
|
|
 Interview Coaching EQ Coaching Report Workplace Culture Conversations of Leadership Personal Leadership |
|
 | ||
 |
Guide To ERP Software
Business Management Software | |
 |
More PR Resources
Press Release Builder | |
| ||
 | ||||
| ||||
|
| ||||
| ||||
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||
|
Email us your ideas on how to make our website more valuable! Thank you Sharon from Toronto Salsa Lessons / Classes for your suggestions to make the newsletter look like the website and profile younger entrepreneurs like Jennifer Lopez and Sean Combs!
|
|
|
