Assistant coaches and intellectual property.

[gandaal]

The issue of intellectual property remains an issue, with one prominent Melbourne club seeking clarification from prominent Melbourne lawyer and former board member of AFL club St Kilda, John Gdanski, on whether one of its assistant coaches, armed with intellectual property, could leave. It's understood this assistant has been put on a general employment contract, as opposed to a specific short-term coaching contract. AFL Coaches Association chief Mark Brayshaw has clarified the IP debate: "Our view is that which is inside a coach's head, is portable, but if it's anything that you can touch, like files and record and that sort of stuff, needs to be left," he said. Citing Brendon Bolton's shift to Carlton, he added: "It's obvious Carlton has hired Brendon, based on that he has been in a fabulous system over the last few years, and they are wanting to see that they can get a bit of that themselves. But Hawthorn and Alastair [Clarkson] are acutely aware that every time one of his underlings is promoted, that advantage is mitigated."

http://www.theage.com.au/sport/psss...in-matthew-pavlichs-book-20151007-gk3ezv.html

Hawthorn are going to call in the lawyers now whenever one of their assistant coaches gets a new job? Are they serious?

Maybe Port Adelaide and Mark Williams should sue them for a portion of the profits they've made over the last 10 years as well. Where does it end?

 

[Messenger]

Where in the article does it say Hawthorn want to sue Bolton? You've either deliberately stirring shit or you're thick.

Let's change the title.

 

[BEEG]

Doesn't sound like something Hawthorn would do, they are a massive fan of Bolton.

 

[gandaal]

Where in the article does it say Hawthorn want to sue Bolton? You've either deliberately stirring shit or you're thick.

Let's change the title.

Just what do you think contacting a lawyer to discuss "whether one of its assistant coaches, armed with intellectual property, could leave" means brainiac?

Lawyers are expensive. You don't talk to them if you don't intend to take action of some sort (if you can).

 

[Messenger]

Just what do you think contacting a lawyer to discuss "whether one of its assistant coaches, armed with intellectual property, could leave" means brainiac?

Lawyers are expensive. You don't talk to them if you don't intend to take action of some sort (if you can).

You sue someone every time you consult a lawyer? Child, please.

You decided it was Hawthorn. Why would you decide to discuss this when he left weeks ago? And when he is the fourth assistant to leave in the last few years?

I'm reading this as an assistant that wants to leave a club. Nothing to do with Bolton's departure, which was supported by Hawthorn.

You read a short article, added 2+2 and got 47. It's a legitimate topic, though.

 

[gandaal]

You sue someone every time you consult a lawyer? Child, please.

You decided it was Hawthorn. Why would you decide to discuss this when he left weeks ago? And when he is the fourth assistant to leave in the last few years?

I'm reading this as an assistant that wants to leave a club. Nothing to do with Bolton's departure, which was supported by Hawthorn.

You read a short article, added 2+2 and got 47. It's a legitimate topic, though.

Wow. Just wow. How are you working on a forum if that's your comprehension level?

It's clearly about Bolton. Who else is on a "general employment contact"?

I should've started this on Bay 13. It's pretty sad when you have to start topics about legitimate issues on the troll forum just to avoid biased moderators.

 

[doppleganger]

Wow. Just wow. How are you working on a forum if that's your comprehension level?

It's clearly about Bolton. Who else is on a "general employment contact"?

I should've started this on Bay 13. It's pretty sad when you have to start topics about legitimate issues on the troll forum just to avoid biased moderators.

Bolton is a senior coach.

I read that as it is a current assistant coach that a club has enquired about, as full coaching panels are yet to be finalised for 2016.

It could be Hawthorn, but it ain't to do with Bolton.

Are you aware of the terms of employment of all of the assistant coaches in the league??

 

[Messenger]

Wow. Just wow. How are you working on a forum if that's your comprehension level?

It's clearly about Bolton. Who else is on a "general employment contact"?

I should've started this on Bay 13. It's pretty sad when you have to start topics about legitimate issues on the troll forum just to avoid biased moderators.

You're across all the employment arrangements these days?

A club is seeking information about whether an assistant could leave. And from this you get that it is about an assistant that has left to take a senior role and did so with the public blessing of their former employer. They were in fact released from the arrangement on the eve of the finals.

But from this you get "Hawthorn are going to sue Brendan Bolton". For what? The contents of his brain?

Perhaps you should have started it on the Bay....

 

[76woodenspooners]

The first part of the article has nothing to do with Bolton. He'd already left five weeks before the article was written. No point Hawthorn consulting a lawyer because Bolton "could leave" - he already had, over a month earlier!

Collingwood has form in this area. IIRC they lawyered up when one of Neeld or Watters (can't remember which one) revealed a bunch of IP in their job interview with their new club.

 

[RelaxMax]

It's a legitimate topic, though.

I have wondered before Bolton's move to Carlton about the area of intellectual property

So <insert name here>'s work at Hawthorn has added to its success as a club

Can s/he not use the ideas s/he began and developed at one club, to another?

Rhetorically speaking

 

[smeltitdeltit]

Crickets from the OP.......

 

[The 747]

I have wondered before Bolton's move to Carlton about the area of intellectual property

So <insert name here>'s work at Hawthorn has added to its success as a club

Can s/he not use the ideas s/he began and developed at one club, to another?

Rhetorically speaking

Usual employment stipulates any IP you generate while working belongs to the employer. Pretty hard to enforce the non transfer of ideas though.

 

[76woodenspooners]

I have wondered before Bolton's move to Carlton about the area of intellectual property

So <insert name here>'s work at Hawthorn has added to its success as a club

Can s/he not use the ideas s/he began and developed at one club, to another?

Rhetorically speaking

Hmmm, "Hawthorn" + possible female gender pronoun ...

... You wouldn't be referring to a media manager?

Rhetorically speaking of course

 

[RelaxMax]

Hmmm, "Hawthorn" + possible female gender pronoun ...

... You wouldn't be referring to a media manager?

Rhetorically speaking of course

I see where you're going with that but no

I was being politically correct

*generations before mine rolling in their graves*

 

[ziad]

the gene pool in afl is so small it is ridiculous - what if a real thinker from outside came in?

 

[RelaxMax]

Usual employment stipulates any IP you generate while working belongs to the employer. Pretty hard to enforce the non transfer of ideas though.

Would be interesting to see how it would pan out in the courts

As in are the employment agreements actually enforceable

Or for that matter

Legal

 

[76woodenspooners]

I see where you're going with that but no

She's doing an awesome job by the way. Slow start to the year, but really worked her way into it.

Would be interesting to see how it would pan out in the courts

As in are the employment agreements actually enforceable

Or for that matter

Legal

If an employment agreement has an IP assignment clause that has been broken, and it could be proven; I'd be surprised if it wasn't upheld.

 

[Spook]

Just what do you think contacting a lawyer to discuss "whether one of its assistant coaches, armed with intellectual property, could leave" means brainiac?

Lawyers are expensive. You don't talk to them if you don't intend to take action of some sort (if you can).

Do really think it means sue? so lasers on sue do they and don't provide advise? Ok whatever you d#%^ ca&

 

[gandaal]

Even if it isn't a reference to the Bolton situation, and is referring to another coach leaving a leading contender, the question is still valid. What is the club thinking? Surely this is a Pandora's box nobody wants opened?

 

[dean31]

Many won't agree with this but I think that the Hawks have provided well and truly more than their fair share of assistant coaches to the rest of the competition. It has been a never ending drain on the team and if the team was not so strong it could have been a lot more detrimental to their on field success. It Hurt them after 08 and I think Clarkson changed a few things so would could assume other roles more easily. Hawthorn should in future sign their most valued assistants to long term contracts that cannot be so easily walked out on as they have given enough.

 

[Messenger]

I have wondered before Bolton's move to Carlton about the area of intellectual property

So <insert name here>'s work at Hawthorn has added to its success as a club

Can s/he not use the ideas s/he began and developed at one club, to another?

Rhetorically speaking

The short answer is of course they can. Game plans, opposition analysis, training methodology as they exist in the mind of the appointee are fair game. They don't get to the take written information, video, databases out of the club.

The grey area is strategic; list strategy, salary cap, etc.

 

[Damon_3388]

Even if it isn't a reference to the Bolton situation, and is referring to another coach leaving a leading contender, the question is still valid. What is the club thinking? Surely this is a Pandora's box nobody wants opened?

Doesn't this stuff happen all the time in other sports, though? I know in the NFL and college football there's an annual shuffle of assistants and head coaches, and while it gets strong media coverage, there doesn't seem to be anything like the apprehension and hand-wringing we have over it here.

 

[cartel]

Weak clubs have been poaching assistants from premiership clubs for years now - currently Hawthorn, previously Collingwood and before that Geelong.

Clarkson has demonstrated that he can cope with the loss of quality assistants, he is clearly on another level to most of the other coaches.

Quality coaches and teams should be innovative enough to stay ahead of the pack.

The first part of the article has nothing to do with Bolton. He'd already left five weeks before the article was written. No point Hawthorn consulting a lawyer because Bolton "could leave" - he already had, over a month earlier!

Collingwood has form in this area. IIRC they lawyered up when one of Neeld or Watters (can't remember which one) revealed a bunch of IP in their job interview with their new club.

Both us and Melbourne benefited so much from the IP they brought haha. Both were unmitigated disasters.

 

[Finest of Wines]

The short answer is of course they can. Game plans, opposition analysis, training methodology as they exist in the mind of the appointee are fair game. They don't get to the take written information, video, databases out of the club.

The grey area is strategic; list strategy, salary cap, etc.

With good internal controls at a football club, assistant coaches shouldn't have access to salary cap information. That should be known by only a few ie. head coach, list manager, CEO, etc