by Dr. Cecil Clements (28th August 2012)
I hope it’s a good Tuesday morning for you here in Mumbai. As I sit in my office, it’s overcast and raining; looks like a dreary morning. But it’s a day still full of wonderful opportunities for each one of us.
I want to share with you this morning, something that’s been in the news the last couple of days and has to do with Apple and Samsung and the case that was going on about how Apple had sued Samsung, saying that they had stolen some of the techniques that they have in their own phones, like the pinching, the display, etc. The big news is that Apple won the case and there’s a $1 billion fine that needs to be paid by Samsung.
As I thought about that and the interest that it generated, I looked at articles that had come up around this whole issue. One particular article that was in Harvard Business Review piqued my interest because of its title: ‘Who Cares If Samsung Copied Apple?’ by James Allworth. The point that he was trying to make was that it doesn’t really matter. What really matters, is the people. Apple says that when something is copied, then it stunts their innovation. He says that it really didn’t when they had a lawsuit against Microsoft earlier, which they lost. Innovation picked up, the iMac came in; that was the case he was trying to make. Ultimately let the customer decide. Let both companies make what they have to make and forget about these lawsuits, about intellectual property, etc. and let the customer benefit.
I continued reading. Various people responded to his blog and I was quite surprised to see how many of them agreed with him and now many didn’t. Some even saw beyond this whole picture and said, “It’s really not about Apple suing Samsung. It’s about Patent Laws that are not clearly defined.” Patent Laws were based on the chemical industry, something that could be easily identified if there was a complaint of something being copied. Chemical formulae are there in black and white or ‘2+2=4’; whereas intellectual property was more vague and so copyright laws really couldn’t cover it.
I came across one person who wrote back to the author and I want to quote him. He said, “I suppose you won’t mind if I republish your article without citing you or giving you credit, then? It really is what’s best for the community and you’re just an individual.” Then he says, “Nah… I’ll just take the title and publish a different story that benefits me directly.”
I thought that he made the point, a point that we always need to keep in the forefront when we look at all that’s going on. He brought the whole thing down to just him and the author. He says to the author, “If I take the article that you have written and then talk about it like it is mine and not give you any credit, will that be ok? Or let me just take the entire contents of the article and put my name to it. After all it’s the community that benefits.”
I thought that he put the whole issue in such good context because the reason why we have these laws is to protect people. There’s an investment that has gone in, research done. For a particular period of time, the law states that you can get back what you have invested in research by the product that you have made. But if somebody else takes your product, all that money that you have put into the research, goes.
As he made this point, I thought that’s exactly where we ought to be. We need to be so careful about what belongs to others; and not take it and act like it belongs to us.
Glancing through on plagiarism, I remember my wife, Sheila, who is a counselor, attended a counseling seminar some years ago. She came away distraught saying, “I looked at all the notes that they gave everyone. Everything was plagiarized. They didn’t give credit for any of the theories to any of the people. They acted like it was their own.”
Recently in GMA News Online, there was an article on Plagiarism by a senator who is still in hot water because he published a lengthy part of somebody else’s blog in his own speech. Then he goes on to tell the person who wrote this blog, “You have a blog. It is meant to be shared. It’s in the public domain, so it’s not plagiarism.” There was such a furor that came up. He didn’t say that this thought belonged to somebody else. And it’s so important for us to give credit where credit is due.
How does it apply to you and me? I was reading that one of the top reasons for an unsettled atmosphere in companies, for disgruntled employees, is that they don’t get credit for what they do. At a macro level, there’s a huge fight between Apple and Samsung. At a micro level, it’s happening within us, in our frames of references. There are people around us who work hard and we ought to make sure that they get the credit for it. One of the best ways to increase company morale is to make sure that the person who got the idea gets the credit.
I remember watching The West Wing, one of my favorite television shows and how the senior staff brings a junior staff into the President’s office. The President looks at him, wondering what that guy was doing there. Then a senior staff says, “Sir, this is the person responsible for the idea that we have been talking about.” I love that scene because they gave credit where credit was due.
There’s a healthy tension that exists between the Law on one hand and Ethics and Morality on the other. When you come down to it, it’s the right thing to do. Yet we are trying to legislate the right thing because we are doing the wrong thing. If we can legislate it, then we can find ways to still keep the law but yet, do the wrong thing. Ethics and morality are still at the heart and must be of all we do. That’s what helps companies to have such good relationships between people in the organization, where everybody is respected for who they are and what they contribute, where people are not taking it away and saying, “I have the power to do so. To heck with you. I don’t care about you. I have the power to exploit you.” Then you’ll keep disgruntled employees in the company and have bad morale in the company.
So when you look back to the Harvard Business Review blog ‘Who Cares If Samsung Copied Apple?’ I think we ought to care. Because any time we start thinking only about whether this is right by the letter of the law, we are in trouble.
In our Holy Book, there’s a place where one of Jesus’ disciples says, “Master, how many time should I forgive my brother? Seven times?” And Jesus looks at him and says, “No. Seventy times seven.” When you look at that discussion, you realize what he was asking. If it was seven times, then the eighth time, he wouldn’t need to forgive. He could keep the law for the seven times, and then the eighth time, take the guy to task. Jesus just blows him off, saying, “Seventy times seven.” Just forget the numbers; it’s about what you need to do.
Must we care about these things? I think we should. These are the things that we ought to care about. We still need to bring ethics and morality into good governance in the places that we are. I hope that stimulates your thinking this morning.
Let me pray for you. Almighty God, Lord, precious people you have brought on to this call, who have given 10 minutes of their time to listen to something. I pray that you would take these words and you would embed it upon their hearts, that they would look around with fresh new eyes and new insight and see that credit is given to whoever it is that needs to get it. I pray that along with it, you would just let the morale in these companies grow so that there’s a healthy atmosphere for innovation and creativity and growth and that people on this call would be ones who would help growth happen in their companies because of this. I bless them in Your Name and with Your Authority, Lord Jesus. Amen.
I hope it’s a good Tuesday morning for you here in Mumbai. As I sit in my office, it’s overcast and raining; looks like a dreary morning. But it’s a day still full of wonderful opportunities for each one of us.
I want to share with you this morning, something that’s been in the news the last couple of days and has to do with Apple and Samsung and the case that was going on about how Apple had sued Samsung, saying that they had stolen some of the techniques that they have in their own phones, like the pinching, the display, etc. The big news is that Apple won the case and there’s a $1 billion fine that needs to be paid by Samsung.
As I thought about that and the interest that it generated, I looked at articles that had come up around this whole issue. One particular article that was in Harvard Business Review piqued my interest because of its title: ‘Who Cares If Samsung Copied Apple?’ by James Allworth. The point that he was trying to make was that it doesn’t really matter. What really matters, is the people. Apple says that when something is copied, then it stunts their innovation. He says that it really didn’t when they had a lawsuit against Microsoft earlier, which they lost. Innovation picked up, the iMac came in; that was the case he was trying to make. Ultimately let the customer decide. Let both companies make what they have to make and forget about these lawsuits, about intellectual property, etc. and let the customer benefit.
I continued reading. Various people responded to his blog and I was quite surprised to see how many of them agreed with him and now many didn’t. Some even saw beyond this whole picture and said, “It’s really not about Apple suing Samsung. It’s about Patent Laws that are not clearly defined.” Patent Laws were based on the chemical industry, something that could be easily identified if there was a complaint of something being copied. Chemical formulae are there in black and white or ‘2+2=4’; whereas intellectual property was more vague and so copyright laws really couldn’t cover it.
I came across one person who wrote back to the author and I want to quote him. He said, “I suppose you won’t mind if I republish your article without citing you or giving you credit, then? It really is what’s best for the community and you’re just an individual.” Then he says, “Nah… I’ll just take the title and publish a different story that benefits me directly.”
I thought that he made the point, a point that we always need to keep in the forefront when we look at all that’s going on. He brought the whole thing down to just him and the author. He says to the author, “If I take the article that you have written and then talk about it like it is mine and not give you any credit, will that be ok? Or let me just take the entire contents of the article and put my name to it. After all it’s the community that benefits.”
I thought that he put the whole issue in such good context because the reason why we have these laws is to protect people. There’s an investment that has gone in, research done. For a particular period of time, the law states that you can get back what you have invested in research by the product that you have made. But if somebody else takes your product, all that money that you have put into the research, goes.
As he made this point, I thought that’s exactly where we ought to be. We need to be so careful about what belongs to others; and not take it and act like it belongs to us.
Glancing through on plagiarism, I remember my wife, Sheila, who is a counselor, attended a counseling seminar some years ago. She came away distraught saying, “I looked at all the notes that they gave everyone. Everything was plagiarized. They didn’t give credit for any of the theories to any of the people. They acted like it was their own.”
Recently in GMA News Online, there was an article on Plagiarism by a senator who is still in hot water because he published a lengthy part of somebody else’s blog in his own speech. Then he goes on to tell the person who wrote this blog, “You have a blog. It is meant to be shared. It’s in the public domain, so it’s not plagiarism.” There was such a furor that came up. He didn’t say that this thought belonged to somebody else. And it’s so important for us to give credit where credit is due.
How does it apply to you and me? I was reading that one of the top reasons for an unsettled atmosphere in companies, for disgruntled employees, is that they don’t get credit for what they do. At a macro level, there’s a huge fight between Apple and Samsung. At a micro level, it’s happening within us, in our frames of references. There are people around us who work hard and we ought to make sure that they get the credit for it. One of the best ways to increase company morale is to make sure that the person who got the idea gets the credit.
I remember watching The West Wing, one of my favorite television shows and how the senior staff brings a junior staff into the President’s office. The President looks at him, wondering what that guy was doing there. Then a senior staff says, “Sir, this is the person responsible for the idea that we have been talking about.” I love that scene because they gave credit where credit was due.
There’s a healthy tension that exists between the Law on one hand and Ethics and Morality on the other. When you come down to it, it’s the right thing to do. Yet we are trying to legislate the right thing because we are doing the wrong thing. If we can legislate it, then we can find ways to still keep the law but yet, do the wrong thing. Ethics and morality are still at the heart and must be of all we do. That’s what helps companies to have such good relationships between people in the organization, where everybody is respected for who they are and what they contribute, where people are not taking it away and saying, “I have the power to do so. To heck with you. I don’t care about you. I have the power to exploit you.” Then you’ll keep disgruntled employees in the company and have bad morale in the company.
So when you look back to the Harvard Business Review blog ‘Who Cares If Samsung Copied Apple?’ I think we ought to care. Because any time we start thinking only about whether this is right by the letter of the law, we are in trouble.
In our Holy Book, there’s a place where one of Jesus’ disciples says, “Master, how many time should I forgive my brother? Seven times?” And Jesus looks at him and says, “No. Seventy times seven.” When you look at that discussion, you realize what he was asking. If it was seven times, then the eighth time, he wouldn’t need to forgive. He could keep the law for the seven times, and then the eighth time, take the guy to task. Jesus just blows him off, saying, “Seventy times seven.” Just forget the numbers; it’s about what you need to do.
Must we care about these things? I think we should. These are the things that we ought to care about. We still need to bring ethics and morality into good governance in the places that we are. I hope that stimulates your thinking this morning.
Let me pray for you. Almighty God, Lord, precious people you have brought on to this call, who have given 10 minutes of their time to listen to something. I pray that you would take these words and you would embed it upon their hearts, that they would look around with fresh new eyes and new insight and see that credit is given to whoever it is that needs to get it. I pray that along with it, you would just let the morale in these companies grow so that there’s a healthy atmosphere for innovation and creativity and growth and that people on this call would be ones who would help growth happen in their companies because of this. I bless them in Your Name and with Your Authority, Lord Jesus. Amen.
No comments:
Post a Comment