Who Owns Evan Brown's Brain?
The legal filings of the lawsuit DSC Communications v. Evan Brown
are provided on this web site.
It takes a lot of searching the records to find the abuses of the court.
One of the first abuses is recorded in the transcript of the hearing
on April 30, 1997 (Motion for Protective Order pg26:16).
Judge Roach's statement also clearly shows he was communicating with DSC's
attorneys in violation of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedures.
Judge Roach personally owned shares of stock in DSC yet he ruled on
evidence and testimony while in direct violation of the Texas Constitution.
Note: The Texas Court of Appeals ruled Judge Roach to be disqualified
and all his orders were ruled void.
The case was assigned to Judge Henderson after the Court of Appeals issued
their ruling on Judge Roach.
Judge Henderson violated the Texas Rules of Civil Procedures when
issued an Agreed Scheduling Order despite my objections.
The scheduling order put me to a disadvantage due to my lack of
knowledge and experience with the legal system.
Judge Henderson denied my April 8,2002 3rd Request for Discovery to
Plaintiff and 2nd Request for Interrogatories to Plaintiff due to my
misunderstanding of the scheduling order.
Judge Henderson denied my 2nd Motion for Summary Judgement in violation
of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedures because DSC/Alcatel failed to file
a Response to Motion for Summary Judgement.
Judge Henderson granted DSC's Motion for Summary Judgement despite the
presence of material fact issues.
Judge Henderson issued a Final Judgement disposing of the lawsuit after
granting DSC's Motion for Summary Judgement for Breach of Contract despite
the fact that DSC had several other claims in their Amended Original
The Jury Fee was paid to the court for a jury trial yet
there was no jury. Judge Henderson abused the Texas Rules of Civil
Procedures again by personally evaluating the facts and
testimony of the parties and personally ruling on the fact issues presented.
As a result, an undeveloped thought in a persons mind is now qualified
by the Texas courts to be an invention.
As a result, if you receive compensation (pay check) all your thoughts
(24 hours a day, 7 days a week) belong to your employer.
DSC Communications was a manufacturer of telecommunications equipment
and there is no reference to any product sales of software reverse
engineering services or product in any of their SEC filings or other
company literature, yet Judge Henderson ruled that my idea was along the
line of work or business.
The Texas Court of Appeals denied my appeal which was based in part on
Judge Hendersons violations of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedures.
The Texas State Supreme Court denied my petition for review as allowed
by the Texas Legislature.
Texas State Supreme Court is allowed to pick and choose what cases they
wish to hear.
The Texas State Supreme Court is the body that created the Texas Rules
of Civil Procedures and is the body that enforces those rules.
The long and short of the seven years I spent in litigating this case
is that there is no justice in Texas courts.
Judge Henderson violates the rules, the Court of Appeals chooses not to
rule on the lower court rules violations, and the Texas State Supreme Court
chooses to turn a blind eye to the lower courts abuses.
One story I've heard over the years is that in Texas, businesses contribute
substantially to the reelection campaigns of judges even though many judges
run for election un-opposed.
The TV program "60 Minutes" has documented many of the problems with
Texas courts and judges in the past and nothing has changed to correct
It is my belief that justice is forsale in Texas.
Work in Texas at your own risk
If you are a creative thinker and problem solver, you are much better
off working in California where you have some protection from your
Please note: The French telecommunications
company Alcatel acquired DSC Communications, Inc. in September 1998.
October 8, 2004
THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS
Today the Supreme Court of Texas denied the petition for review in the above-referenced case.
This is the end of the road for this lawsuit.
Now DSC/Alcatel has legal right and title to thoughts that existed
only in my brain when they filed the lawsuit.
DSC/Alcatel used their corporate influence with court system to deny me
my rights and steal my thoughts.
I am extremely discouraged. I believed that eventually I would have a jury
trial and the jury would rule on the facts in the case. Judge Henderson
personally decided what the facts were in this case and ignored all my
objections and all the fact issues I raised.
I had an idea that I had developed on my own time over many years.
My idea had not been written down or recorded it in any way.
DSC/Alcatel claimed that since I was in their employee at the time I solved the
last portion of the problem, they owned my idea even though they had never paid me to work on it.
DSC/Alcatel told the court that I stole their "invention" and misapproprated
their Intellectual Property.
Imagine that, Judge Henderson rule that I stole an idea that existed only in my mind. And just where did I steal this idea? go figure. How much did DSC
contribute to Judge Henderson's re-election campaign? He runs un-opposed
as a republican candidate for judge.
Texas State District Judge Curt Henderson through his rulings has clearly ruled
that an idea that does not exist in any tangable form qualifies as an
"invention" even though it has never been proven to function properly or
contain anything novel or creative in nature.
DSC/Alcatel invested wisely in their judicial campaign contributions.
Money wins and the people loose.
On the positive side, my idea did not work as I had thought it would.
DSC/Alcatel paid the lawfirm Lynn Tillotson & Pinker nearly $500,000
to litigate this case over the past seven years. I gained an education
in the legal system, DSC/Alcatel gained nothing.
In January 2000 I filed for Chapter 13 bankruptcy with a 5 year payout plan.
DSC/Alcatel was one of the listed creditors and when the debts were discharged
the other day, DSC/Alcatel's judgement against me for $332,000 was included.
What did DSC/Alcatel get for their $500,000. They got Judge Henderson to
sign their Final Judgement granting them ownership to an idea that doesn't
work and a judgement for $332,000 for attorneys fees that they can not collect.
No doubt that DSC/Alcatel will use these documents to threaten their
employees into complience with Alcatel's wishes. This might have been a problem
if this case hadn't had so much attention in the media over the years.
Creative workers now know that Alcatel sues its employees so hopefully
creative employees will avoid working for Alcatel and any businesses run by
former DSC officers.
When DSC filed this suit, they had over 7,000 employees at their headquaters
in Plano, Texas and they were growing. Today DSC is owned by Alcatel with
headquaters in Paris, France and only have about 1,500 employees in Plano.
In the end there were no winners, everybody lost.
Now that the case is over, I'm going back to what I enjoy, computer programming.
Anyone out there looking for a really creative programmer? If so, drop me a
note and lets talk.
- Evan Brown.
August 23, 2004
Brown files Petition for Review with the Supreme Court of Texas
The struggle continues! Be afraid, be very afraid! If we lose this battle
then you too may well lose ownership of what you do on your personal time.
It's happening to me here in Texas, corporate power and greed threaten
all of us. I developed an "idea" on my own personal time over many years and
the company that employed me (DSC) was in the telecommunications business.
My idea was a software reverse engineering concept but that didn't stop DSC
from claiming ownership to all my personal time and effort I put into my idea.
It is time for Texas to get a Workers Bill of Rights. Several states have
already passed legislation protecting workers. Unfortunately workers in Texas
are not protected.
Please join me as I fight to get a Workers Bill of Rights passed in Texas.
If you are interested, concerned or can help, please contact
We have filed a
Petition for Review
with the Supreme Court of Texas.
Please take a few minutes and read this petition, the courts aren't
following their own rules and procedures. You or a friend could be next
to fall victom to corporate power, greed and the Texas courts.
July 13, 2004
Brown files Motion for Rehearing with Dallas Court of Appeals
Attorney Martin Peterson has prepared an
Appellants Motion for Rehearing
which very clearly identifies errors made by the Court of Appeals and
by the Trial Court Judge Curt Henderson. This motion focus on the root issues of the law
concerning employment contracts and the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure
166a (Motions for Summary Judgement). Any employee working in Texas
should take a few minutes and read this motion.
The Texas Court of Appeals at Dallas has issued a ruling and opinion
upholding the lower court Final Judgement.
Evan Brown isn't giving up on his 7 year court battle over ownership
of thoughts in his brain.
Court of Appeals Opinion
Judge Henderson of the 219th District Court in Collin County, Texas
granted DSC Communications Corporation, Inc n/k/a Alcatel, USA a Final
Judgement granting DSC ownership of thoughts that existed only in
Evan Brown's brain.
The final judgement was issued based on DSC's motion for summary judgement
which Evan tried his best to stop with his response to the summary judgement.
Evan was unaware that all he needed was an affidavit to raise a fact issue
in order to have a jury trial.
There were several other fact issues which the court chose to ignore.
November 20, 2003
January 5, 2004
Appellants Reply Brief
To see how the case proceeded, take a look at the legal filings.
This lawsuit is a Case of Corporate Power, Greed, and Corruption
In a modern David vs. Goliath tale, Texan computer expert Evan Brown was
sued for thoughts that existed only in his brain.
Brown had been mentally formulating a way to convert old computer code
into new languages since 1975. While he was employed by DSC Communications of
Plano, Texas (1987-1997), Brown mentioned the idea to his employer in 1996,
who then decided
they own the rights to Brown's thoughts, even though he came up with
the idea for a software conversion procedure on his own time, and it was
to the work he was doing at DSC and is was not along the lines of DSC's
business. The company demanded Brown disclose
his idea to them, and when Brown refused, DSC fired him and filed this lawsuit
This case has made news around the world and is setting precedents in
intellectual property law. From the New York Times to Playboy Magazine,
Russia to India, there are over 180 hits on
for "Evan Brown"+law+review. It is obvious that people are interested
in this case and the outcome.
See MEDIAfor more details.
Brown's idea might have been worth a fortune
in 1997 when the IT industry was faced with the Y2K conversions.
DSC claims that Brown, who worked for them ten years before his
termination, signed an agreement making all his ideas property of DSC.
Please read the agreement
and you will see that it only applies to INVENTIONS (not ideas) that are along
the line of DSC's BUSINESS. DSC never paid an employee to work on or
develop any such idea (no evidence produced).
Brown never had an invention, all he had was an idea which does not
fall within the scope of the agreement.
When Brown was ordered by the court to disclose his idea, Brown
disclose his idea as a set of working computer programs
and after about 100 days of coding, Brown encountered
a condition in scoping rules that did not work as he had thought.
DSC's experts declared that there was nothing new or novel with the
disclosure and that the idea/disclosure in fact did not work. DSC has
known since October 2000 that the idea did not work, yet they continue
this litigation and have spent in excess of $334,000 so far. This is
a minor expense to a major corporation but absolutely staggering to most
employees to defend against.
I am hopeful that with your help and support, we can present a Workers
Bill of Rights to the Texas legislature that will protect workers and
control the power and greed of oppressive employers.
The case has been in litigation since April 1997.
For more information on this case click here.
A very special thanks to:
Evan's family and friends.
Additional thanks to:
Sayles & Lidji, P.C. for legal support from April 1997 through July 2000
Dale Drake, for many years of legal advice
Martin Peterson, for his appellate work and legal advice
For More Information and e-mail
Please contact me for copies of filings that are not in legal filings web page. I'd love to hear from you. Please contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org
If you would like to contribute to Evan Brown's Legal Defense Fund
and help me fight this attempt by Alcatel to extort my thoughts,
please consider giving at least a little.
This effort may help stop other corporate pirates from stealing your
thoughts and ideas.
PayPal is safe and secure online method of contributing funds.
Paypal takes 30 cents on any donation less than $15, and an additional 2.7% on anything over that.
Or, you can mail a contribution to:
Evan Brown Legal Defense Fund
c/o Evan Brown
PO Box 31
TX, USA, 76637
Thanks. - Evan Brown
Copyright © 1997 - 2005 Evan Brown. All Rights Reserved.