Hacker News Reader

Comment by lettergram | Hacker News Reader

It's really not much better in the U.S. or elsewhere. I believe it was Nokia which had a patent program where it was a $500 bonus per patent. Meaning, even if you invented something - that was your bonus.

In my current role we have a similar program, beyond the relatively small bonus I think the only benefit is bragging rights. Patenting or inventing something means little to superiors. Large companies focus on the short term stategic initiatives, often being unable to capitalize on long term or even short term opportunities. That's why more nimble startups are more effective.

View on HN

The patent bonus at Nokia was just that, a patent bonus; the purpose of the program was to systematically collect a large portfolio of patents; such a patent mass is used in IPR negotiations with other technology giants. Those patents were mass-produced - I got paid for one too - but I wouldn't call them "inventions".

There were other, substantially larger bonuses for innovations made by staff, when these innovations had larger economical impact (for instance, optimizing the production line).

Patents aren’t really equivalent to inventions. In companies where they are thought to be the same, abuse with frivolous patent applications is rife.

Frivolous

Edited.

The inventors of synthetic diamonds at General Electric didn't receive anything other than their normal wage (perhaps a little bonus, I don't remember).

Tracey Hall received a $10 US Savings Bond

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tracy_Hall

Same in my EU based company (~600 ppl, owned by a large conglomerate ), we are encouraged to come up with all kinds of BS to patent for a one time bonus of i believe 1000$ or 1500$ and your name on the patent

> [...] come up with all kinds of BS to patent [...]

I guess that that is the point. I worked for a similar company. They were not interested in groundbreaking one-of-a-kind patent. They were looking for something to use as a countermeasure if another company in the same sector sues them.

A new chemical process, a new antibiotic, or something of that scale can be used to create a new successful product, save lives, etc. Patents were designed to make sure that companies could profit from them, but that the knowledge was not lost just because they keep it secret.

In software development, I have seen a lot of "method to send content to a remote storage using gesture-based commands" (this one is made up). When they just mean that a developer implemented a drag & drop touch functionality for the phone that sends a file to a server. A necessary implementation, but hardly an invention as any developer will come with a similar solution in minutes if presented with the problem.

Was the same with Cisco too, I can't understand how this is presented as a failure of the Japanese when it seems standard in the industry.

I don't think the bonus was the issue so much as the career path. He left Toshiba after being "promoted" into a position where he had no subordinates and no budget.

Same here for the UK engineering company I used to work at. I believe this sort of thing is fairly common. Quite ridiculous, really.

> I believe it was Nokia which had a patent program where it was a $500 bonus per patent. Meaning, even if you invented something - that was your

The one patent per Scrum sprint program, bred a whole encyclopedia of "apparatus or algorithm for searching, publishing, or displaying a thing within another thing" patents.

Was that always the case?

I had a friend whose father was getting royalties for some chemical manufacturing process that he came up with. I recall that royalties were planned to be a major component of his retirement.

I wonder if it used to be better. I have heard of one company where engineers would get some percentage of savings or increased revenue if they came up with something. Then somebody got a several hundred thousand dollar award and the program got cancelled. I have received $500 for an idea what got valued at $2 million during the award ceremony.

It was better at my employer in the mid-2000's. Systems process projects (6-sigma stuff) paid out to stakeholders in the project proportional to the measured cost savings in results. The payouts were similarly cancelled not because of large payouts, but more so for chasing cost-savings instead of product improbements.

"for chasing cost-savings "

It's interesting that for execs big bonuses for good work are considered motivational and necessary whereas for the little guy good work doesn't need to be rewarded because it would add cost.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com