<https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/article.analysis-why-red-bulls-swoop-for-new-engine-boss-is-such-a-huge-statement-of.6CRojFwvlbUpJc7JkPEeTi.html>

RBR have 'poached' Merc power plan guy of 20 years Ben Hodgkinson. He'll leave Merc after 2022 when
his contract is up and head RBRs all new power plant division to make engines for 2025.

It's stated in the above-linked article that Ben Hodgkinson 'can't take Mercedes IP' with him
(though they state that he can't "unlearn" knowledge) and that the new RBR power plants 'won't use
Honda IP'.

Is IP considered to be head office drawings and the like? Because there's no way the new power
plant won't be a 'child' of Honda and Merc (within whatever the 2025 power plant specs are agreed
to be). If the current RBR team and Ben Hodgkinson both make their own measurements, pictures and
drawings of the two power plants I guess that's not considered to be 'IP' belonging to the current
manufacturers?

Seems like a quagmire to me.
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy little classification
in the DSM"
David Melville

This is not an email and hasn't been checked for viruses by any half-arsed self-promoting software.

~misfit~ <shaun.at.pukekohe@gmail.com> wrote:
> <https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/article.analysis-why-red-bulls-swoop-for-new-engine-boss-is-such-a-huge-statement-of.6CRojFwvlbUpJc7JkPEeTi.html>
>
>
> RBR have 'poached' Merc power plan guy of 20 years Ben Hodgkinson. He'll leave Merc after 2022 when
> his contract is up and head RBRs all new power plant division to make engines for 2025.
>
> It's stated in the above-linked article that Ben Hodgkinson 'can't take Mercedes IP' with him
> (though they state that he can't "unlearn" knowledge) and that the new RBR power plants 'won't use
> Honda IP'.

It's always tricky. You can't wipe your memory, but that's life. In
business, there are two models for maintaining exclusive access to
technology, and they are trade secrets and patents.

Trade secrets have always existed, but have no protection from it
leaking and then being copied. You have to be very strict in the way
that you control the secret as once it's out, it's out.

Patents were explicitly invented to encourage the sharing of knowledge
of new approaches to trigger innovation, allowing people to build on
existing technology while preventing direct copying by providing legal
protection against anyone simply replicating the patented work for a
limited period.

For F1, the secrets - technology, process and approach - are closely
guarded, but there will always be a churn of technical staff that means
that (eventually) every secret is revealed. You can't stop people
changing employer, and there are limits to how much you can limit them
within an area (restraint of trade laws clash with reasonable
contractual limits).

Typically - and I assume but don't know in this case - you work around
this using "gardening leave" and/or changes in duties. As you come
close to the person leaving, you limit their access to new technologies,
or even give them an extended period where they are paid but no longer
actually work. That way, the data they bring to the new employer is
(say) a year out of date. In the meantime, you hope to make it less
interesting for them to spend time retrofitting the 2021 solution to
their 2022 technology (it's rarely if ever going to be cut and paste
given the complexity of F1 technology) than to find their own novel
solutions with the benefit of the skills and knowledge that your new
recruit brings.

Of course, there is always a risk that someone shares the 2021 data
to their next employer while they're still under contract...but that
would (obviously) be a significant breach of contract and have serious
ramifications...as the Spygate scandal showed over a decade ago.

> Is IP considered to be head office drawings and the like? Because there's no way the new power
> plant won't be a 'child' of Honda and Merc (within whatever the 2025 power plant specs are agreed
> to be). If the current RBR team and Ben Hodgkinson both make their own measurements, pictures and
> drawings of the two power plants I guess that's not considered to be 'IP' belonging to the current
> manufacturers?

I think that if someone were found to have drawings that they produced
after leaving (say) Mercedes, that would be fine. Similarly, if they
wrote down some notes about general design principles, it is probably
going to be fine.

IF, however, there was reasonable evidence that detailed drawings and
measurements were made when the person had physical access to the
engines and/or formal designs, I think that *would* be considered to be
IP. For the reasons I give above, I'm not sure it's all that useful.
Applying a significantly different design to an existing engine is not
simple, let alone trying to create a coherent "son of Merc and Honda"
engine. Nonetheless, I think that all parties will be doing their very
best to avoid any perception of direct technology transfer (for very
different reasons).

> Seems like a quagmire to me.

Yep.

Il 28/04/2021 11:45, Mark ha scritto:

Ben Hodgkinson will be subject to heavy electroshock treatment before he
leaves MB ;-)
S

On 28/04/2021 9:45 pm, Mark wrote:
<snipped>
> IF, however, there was reasonable evidence that detailed drawings and
> measurements were made when the person had physical access to the
> engines and/or formal designs, I think that *would* be considered to be
> IP. For the reasons I give above, I'm not sure it's all that useful.
> Applying a significantly different design to an existing engine is not
> simple, let alone trying to create a coherent "son of Merc and Honda"
> engine.

Oh I agree regarding an existing engine. However there's this (from
<https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/article.analysis-why-red-bulls-swoop-for-new-engine-boss-is-such-a-huge-statement-of.6CRojFwvlbUpJc7JkPEeTi.html>
):

"... as he begins shaping his team to focus on constructing an all-new engine for the new formula
to be introduced in 2025".

Cheers,

--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy little classification
in the DSM"
David Melville

This is not an email and hasn't been checked for viruses by any half-arsed self-promoting software.

On Wednesday, April 28, 2021 at 9:30:58 PM UTC-6, ~misfit~ wrote:
> On 28/04/2021 9:45 pm, Mark wrote:
> <snipped>
> > IF, however, there was reasonable evidence that detailed drawings and
> > measurements were made when the person had physical access to the
> > engines and/or formal designs, I think that *would* be considered to be
> > IP. For the reasons I give above, I'm not sure it's all that useful.
> > Applying a significantly different design to an existing engine is not
> > simple, let alone trying to create a coherent "son of Merc and Honda"
> > engine.
> Oh I agree regarding an existing engine. However there's this (from
> <https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/article.analysis-why-red-bulls-swoop-for-new-engine-boss-is-such-a-huge-statement-of.6CRojFwvlbUpJc7JkPEeTi.html>
> ):
>
> "... as he begins shaping his team to focus on constructing an all-new engine for the new formula
> to be introduced in 2025".
>
> Cheers,
> --
> Shaun.
>
> "Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy little classification
> in the DSM"
> David Melville
>
> This is not an email and hasn't been checked for viruses by any half-arsed self-promoting software.

You have no say.
You pirate your f1 tv coverage.
You are a piece of shit thief.

On Wednesday, April 28, 2021 at 9:30:58 PM UTC-6, ~misfit~ wrote:

> Cheers,

shove your cheers up you rotten,
gay ass, worn out asshole,
you fucking pirating f1 tv, cock sucking,
government handout, loser, mouthpiece,
asshole.