F*Q
发帖数: 3259 | 1 自己整出的一些东西，看起来好像颠覆了被广发认可（但没有被直接证实）的一个很重
要的生物机制。老板由于不懂那方面的东西，逼着我找了一个那方面的专家讨论而且要
求有那方面的知名专家参与才同意我发文章。我联系了一个专家，他让我把数据整成图
发给他，然后他可以评估一下。我整了图也做了图注后发给了那人。发了图后觉得有点
不对劲。如果那个人认可了我对数据做的解释（也就是认可了我说的可能的新的机制）
的话，他也许可能用他们自己的技术（他们不具备我的技术）整一些数据然后抢先把这
个结论发表出去，那我岂不是白折腾？ |
L*******e
发帖数: 2153 | 2 hire a lawyer and ask the collaborator to sign an agreement.
no kidding, this kind of shady things happen all the time!!!
【在 F*Q 的大作中提到】
: 自己整出的一些东西，看起来好像颠覆了被广发认可（但没有被直接证实）的一个很重
: 要的生物机制。老板由于不懂那方面的东西，逼着我找了一个那方面的专家讨论而且要
: 求有那方面的知名专家参与才同意我发文章。我联系了一个专家，他让我把数据整成图
: 发给他，然后他可以评估一下。我整了图也做了图注后发给了那人。发了图后觉得有点
: 不对劲。如果那个人认可了我对数据做的解释（也就是认可了我说的可能的新的机制）
: 的话，他也许可能用他们自己的技术（他们不具备我的技术）整一些数据然后抢先把这
: 个结论发表出去，那我岂不是白折腾？
|
F*Q
发帖数: 3259 | 3 Can you tell a little details?
Honestly, these findings will have huge impact if they are verified
theoretically. Although they don't identify a specific mechanism, they are
the first experimental observations.
【在 L*******e 的大作中提到】
: hire a lawyer and ask the collaborator to sign an agreement.
: no kidding, this kind of shady things happen all the time!!!
|
L*******e
发帖数: 2153 | 4 I don't really know much more, but I do know is that this is VERY COMMON! I
used to work in a lab, the PI is some VIP person : P, one of the postdoc
worked under him was seeking collaboration with someone outside the lab. So
they talked briefly about the project, not in details at all, then the
postdoc hired a lawyer to draft an agreement for both parties to sign which
states that the collaborators will not disclose or use the result for his
own research, agree that the result is the inventor's sole intellectual
properties, that sort of statement. After they both signed the agreement,
they started the discussion and initiation of the collaboration.
are
【在 F*Q 的大作中提到】
: Can you tell a little details?
: Honestly, these findings will have huge impact if they are verified
: theoretically. Although they don't identify a specific mechanism, they are
: the first experimental observations.
|
F*Q
发帖数: 3259 | 5 I see. Thanks for sharing!
The issue here is that the other person may do experiments using their own
techniques in their own lab and produce some data which is different from
mine. But they may be able to reach similar conclusion to mine. I think the
conclusion instead of the data is the key.
I
So
which
【在 L*******e 的大作中提到】
: I don't really know much more, but I do know is that this is VERY COMMON! I
: used to work in a lab, the PI is some VIP person : P, one of the postdoc
: worked under him was seeking collaboration with someone outside the lab. So
: they talked briefly about the project, not in details at all, then the
: postdoc hired a lawyer to draft an agreement for both parties to sign which
: states that the collaborators will not disclose or use the result for his
: own research, agree that the result is the inventor's sole intellectual
: properties, that sort of statement. After they both signed the agreement,
: they started the discussion and initiation of the collaboration.
:
|
L*******e
发帖数: 2153 | 6 You are afraid that they are going to take your project and run? It doesn't
sound like a collaboration, more like consultation? Huh? If that is the case
, you need to address the concern with your PI and ask his opinion, maybe
you two could take action to collaborate with the other guy, or not? Any
situation like this, you need to put words in the front and make written
agreement, verbal agreement is not trust worthy at all. If the other person
has no intention to steal your project and get his own results, then signing
an agreement is a piece of cake for him, right?
hum...that's my opinion.
the
【在 F*Q 的大作中提到】
: I see. Thanks for sharing!
: The issue here is that the other person may do experiments using their own
: techniques in their own lab and produce some data which is different from
: mine. But they may be able to reach similar conclusion to mine. I think the
: conclusion instead of the data is the key.
:
: I
: So
: which
|
e********y
发帖数: 40 | 7 看了你以前和现在的帖子，感觉你有点太理想化，太把自己做的东西当回事了。生物学
中的热点都有N个实验室在竞争。所谓的“颠覆重要生物机制”多半是出于你自己的想
象吧？如果你认为很重要的东西却只有你一个人在做，那就是并不重要。 |
s******y
发帖数: 28562 | 8 一般专家还是要顾及脸面的。
除非你正好找了一个极品。
【在 F*Q 的大作中提到】
: 自己整出的一些东西，看起来好像颠覆了被广发认可（但没有被直接证实）的一个很重
: 要的生物机制。老板由于不懂那方面的东西，逼着我找了一个那方面的专家讨论而且要
: 求有那方面的知名专家参与才同意我发文章。我联系了一个专家，他让我把数据整成图
: 发给他，然后他可以评估一下。我整了图也做了图注后发给了那人。发了图后觉得有点
: 不对劲。如果那个人认可了我对数据做的解释（也就是认可了我说的可能的新的机制）
: 的话，他也许可能用他们自己的技术（他们不具备我的技术）整一些数据然后抢先把这
: 个结论发表出去，那我岂不是白折腾？
|
O******e
发帖数: 4845 | 9 开完会了？
是啊，合作的最重要的前提就是相互信任。还有就是别太把自己的东西当回事－－人家
未必在乎。
【在 s******y 的大作中提到】
: 一般专家还是要顾及脸面的。
: 除非你正好找了一个极品。
|
s******y
发帖数: 28562 | 10 嗯，昨天回来了，今天在疯狂补实验中
【在 O******e 的大作中提到】
: 开完会了？
: 是啊，合作的最重要的前提就是相互信任。还有就是别太把自己的东西当回事－－人家
: 未必在乎。
|
i*****g
发帖数: 11893 | 11 看了你以前和现在的帖子，感觉你有点太理想化，太把自己做的东西当回事了。生物学
中的热点都有N个实验室在竞争。所谓的“颠覆重要生物机制”多半是出于你自己的想
象吧？如果你认为很重要的东西却只有你一个人在做，那就是并不重要。 |
F*Q
发帖数: 3259 | 12 说实话，那个东西在发表之前，确实还只能算做自己的想像。不过可能性好像也不能排
除。
那个东西是个热点，很多人在做，而且都是一些牛人（好像也是因他们做的这个东西热
而牛）。不过据我所知的是还没有别人用我这种技术做。
楼上几位说的对，除非是极品，一般还是不用担心。我找的这位在此之前我们谁也不认
识谁，所以难免多了一点担忧。不过看来他不是极品类。他已经给我回信，而且提出了
他们有变异的样品可以提供给我做（可惜老板上次已经表态这不是他的范围而愿不支持
）。
【在 i*****g 的大作中提到】
: 看了你以前和现在的帖子，感觉你有点太理想化，太把自己做的东西当回事了。生物学
: 中的热点都有N个实验室在竞争。所谓的“颠覆重要生物机制”多半是出于你自己的想
: 象吧？如果你认为很重要的东西却只有你一个人在做，那就是并不重要。
|
