your last statement sums it up. most auto guys have spent serious time/money developing profitable systems and their is considerable ip involved. you would not just give this away without being compensated, either via buyout, licensing, profit sharing, whatever. if your b/d is sharing this ip without your consent, then you have grounds for suit. don bright's contention, is that the ip for auto traders at his firm is in fact also his firms ip to be shared with at their discretion. the reason they claim this right is in exchange for the risk they incur in allowing access to the platform. all questions regarding the sharing aspect of this setup have been flat-out denied or dodged. MY contention, is that auto-trading ip has value above and beyond access to a platform. my contention is also that any firm sharing that ip without compensation in order to generate transaction or trading revenue is either a) behaving unethically/illegally if not fully disclosing the sharing aspect or b) giving the trader one hell of a bad deal. with all the denials and contradictory speak going on in this thread from don, i would put my money on A, but either way, it does not shine a very flattering light on their firm.
Bright has a point.. Asking Bright (or GS) to put your automated code on their system without review - given the attention lately on HFT, controversy on flash crash, etc.. - that's not reasonable. Sure, your IP has to be shared, it would with anyone. If your system is that amazing you should probably be in a position to become a b/d yourself and not have to go thru an intermediary. Your system blows up bigtime - it's Bright on the CBS evening news. Bad stuff.
I guess there needs to be a clarification of how Bright Trading can protect the firm from these things at issue without knowing the trading details...ok maybe not the code as this looks like a bunch of gobbledy gook to me and probably to most traders. but how would they know?...why not just sign a blank check over to the coder and say ok...trade... Lets try to keep this cival and not keep attacking Mr. Bright personally. He does not attack anybody here and he has never acted "tricky" to anybody that I know of. Naturally he must be careful when posting publically and his statements are generalizations. ES
esc sorry, that's not a standard in the industry, gs or otherwise. i run a small hft shop, we run through an ib that clears with a major. never was i asked for ip, and from the speaking i do with other shops, that's not how it's handled there either. it would be ridiculous to even suggest it. the way it's handled is by tried and true broker side controls. i've listed those metrics a few times on this thread. blowups don't happen with the right risk limits. regardless, the 'sharing' don has been talking about wrt to his auto-traders strategies, and the one that is being discussed in this thread... is that the sharing isn't only with bright principals... he made it pretty clear the sharing is with _the rest of the firm_. so, are you trying to tell me that's industry standard? sign-up with a b/d and have your strat concepts shopped to the rest of the guys in the firm? i don't think so.
Concept could equal " send in a zillion orders away from the market, hoping to snag after hours programs that are off by a dollar" (I've heard that, believe it or not..... That's clearly a concept that I don't my Firm associated with - our Clearing Firm would freak out, and it's legally qustionable. Don
i think we all get what a concept is. that wasn't the question. the question was, why you would consider "sharing the concept", if the point is to assess risk?
I wouldn't "share the concept" with other traders or anyone else without the permission of the programmer/trader (many who ask to share with others for various reasons) OK, once more for the interrogeation. We don't share code unless asked to do so, or given permission. If programmer/trader wants to run anything upstream, we ask for a basic concept (as described above, could be horrible idea).... Many traders do share their ideas etc. because they feel that others will share with them - and the "team concept" works really well for many...automated or not - many are glad to not have to "re-invent the wheel" - which ia another reason we try to work with our people....I have handed people solid, proven trading programs that do exactly what they were trying to accomplish - savng them a bunch of time and money. Don
ok, so, why say the below if sharing is optional? i'm not interrogating you. your statements are just contradictory.
Optional sharing of ideas with others. Basic "plan" or "concept" as described before if snding a bunch of orders upstream. (Are we having fun yet? Yes, one more, LOL)...I think we finally wore all the ET'ers down now...they all put this on ignore by now...back to P&R threads, LOL. Don
This is getting stranger by the minute: why would you (ie Bright) ever "be asked" to share someone elses code? Wouldn't the trader/developer choose with whom to share his stuff without your involvement? This whole issue/mess is one of the best reasons to stay retail, if I've ever seen one.