This post stems form other posts I've been reading over the last few weeks but I'm still a little confused over the issue. Sorry if my questions have been answered elsewhere and I just haven't seen them. I also don't mean any disrespect to anyone nor do I wish to start a big argument amoungst everyone.
My questions come from the interpretation of "original", "copying", and "copywrited". It's obvious that most of our projects are copies of the originals. FF, Octavias, Rangmaster etc. Personally I have no problem interpeting what "original" is. To me original is completely new, never been done before, new design etc. The line starts to get blury when some us take an existing designs like a fuzz face, change one component value and call it our own. Techically it is new. Maybe that it will even hold up in a court. Millions of dollars are won and lost every day on "technicalities".
So what about layouts?
Example: website "A" says that I can buy one of his "copywrited" RTS boards to build a pedal. I can use it for my own use or I can use it sell for a profit. I assume that is because his "design" costs have been rolled into the purchase price of the board. However, if I download the layout and make the board myself and sell it for a profit (I'll get to the profit question in a minute) I need to pay him "x" amount of my selling price. The original design has not changed. The circuit is exactly the same as the original, he has just found a new way to put the components in the box. So if he could "repackage" an original design and copywite the new layout, why couldn't I just change his layout (change the trace width, pad dia., or other minute detail) and call it my own?
Now what about the profit question. What constitues a profit? One penny more than what it costs me to build? What about my time to build it? If charge $100.00/hr and I only sell it for $99.00, technically I make no profit and am under no obligation to pay website "A" for his layout. It just seems pretty confusing to me.
I just don't want to step on anyones toes if I decide to sell any of my boxes (I doubt if that will ever happen) It's a big grey area that I wish were more black and white. I did not see any definitive answers in other posts. Would this be something only proper legal personnel could answer?
i think the real question is in the title: ethics vs. legality.
who was is that said "its not illigal unless you get caught."?
This is true in this case...you're not getting caught, so the only question is what feals right on your conscience. If somebody designs a pedal, you shouldn't rip off their work...but if you use a "copyrighted" layout of a fuzz face, with a 11k resisor instead of a 10k, and you don't have a problem ripping off that "author," you're not gunna get caught, unless you do something stupid.
the circuit is public unless company is still in business.
the PCB *layout* has the copyright, in your example.
Buy all U want from designer, assemble pcb, sell all U want.
Build exact copy for PCB 4 yourself only.
Design your *own* pcb and sell all U want.
Redraw the circuit, rearranging the parts, then
"copyright" the circuit yourself.
Make some mods 2 the circuit and it's even *more unique*.
Any circuit that's StiLL in production cannot legally
be sold by somebody else.
That's what copyrights are all about.
Copyrights last 99years.
Unless the owner dies.
If he/she sells the copyright(think U can do that),
then only new owner can produce circuit/pcb.
confusing?
GEOFEX has more on legality issues.
keep soldering
tone
Ethics basically says: Don't rip people off. It's wrong.
The law basically says: If you rip people of and get caught you're in trouble.
But do you feel good selling someone else's stuff and making a lot of money with minimal effort? I wouldn't.
BTW profit is any money you make that is more than you spent on tha product. Say you spent $35 on parts/box/switch. You then sell it for $90. Your profit it 90-35=$55. If you designed the circuit that's fine. If someone else did and they don't know you're selling it, you're being a naughty boy if you ask me :)
I Am NOT A Lawyer!
read this stuff for yourself at:
http://www.uspto.gov
The original company still being in business has no effect on copyrights - copyrights are transferable and last for the lifetime of the creator plus ???(how much longer keeps changing).
However, you can NOT copyright a "device" (in the US anyway). That's what patents are for. Patents last for (now) 20 years from the first application priority date (with some adjustments available for delays in issuing the patent). They are assignable and such assignments may be sold, so again the status of the original company doesn't matter. Any patents on the Fuzz Face expired long ago.
It's generally accepted that board layouts can be copyrighted, but I think even that is arguable according to my reading of the statute (but again, IANAL).
Making changes in a work does not neccessarily keep you from infringing the patent or copyright. A patent is defined by it's claims and "equivalents thereof". You can't get around a patent by changing component values, unless those values are very narrowly defined in the patent (not likely).
A copyright also extends to "derivative works", so just tweaking a layout a bit won't help. Creating your own layout with constant and direct reference to an existing copyrighted layout may "contaminate" your work as a derivative as well. However, the component values are not copyrightable, so changing them is neither here nor there.
Non-profitability, contrary to popular belief, does not free you from infringement of either a patent or a copyright. There are certain "fair use" provisions, but they are narrowly defined.
Again, I AM NOT A LAWYER! You should consult a qualified attorney before taking any action or declining to take any action based on the opinions presented here.
QuoteI can buy one of his "copywrited" RTS boards to build a pedal. I can use it for my own use or I can use it sell for a profit. I assume that is because his "design" costs have been rolled into the purchase price of the board. However, if I download the layout and make the board myself and sell it for a profit (I'll get to the profit question in a minute) I need to pay him "x" amount of my selling price
Exactly. He has the copyright on the board design and if you use his board layout you are violating his copyright.
Quotewhy couldn't I just change his layout (change the trace width, pad dia., or other minute detail) and call it my own?
Minute detail will not do it... you need to start by looking at the schematic only and draw the board from scratch. It's yours then.
QuoteWhat constitues a profit?
Profit motive is not technically a factor in copyright infringement.
Read more at http://www.muzique.com/clones.htm
regards, Jack
Thanks for the article Jack. It's making a little more sense now, even though some of the items are still not as black and white like I would like them to be. One of the things that made me wonder where the "line in the sand" was drawn was a local trucking company had chosen to use the word SIVA as the name of their trucking firm. It used the same font and same color as AVIS. It's pretty clear that it was copied but it must have won in the courts if it ever made it that far. I also just remembered that a while ago (before I was into pedal building) the company I work for (3M) had got 3ms pedals to change it's name because of the 3m name. Here is a link to the document sent to 3ms pedals asking to change their name. http://www.chillingeffects.org/domain/notice.cgi?NoticeID=363&print=yes
3M is fanaticle about IP and patents but we are required to write that stuff into lab books that need to be witnessed and dated so any confusion would be settled by date of lab book entries. Thanks again.
Ethics aside, protection of designs sometimes falls on the ability and practice of protecting "what's yours" in court. Many large companies have teams of lawyers whose sole job is to protect the name, logo and designs of the company. McDonalds is one company that vigorously protects its name, even going so far as to sue a Scottish restaurant named McDonald's. The thing is that this restaurant was a family name and had been in business for over a century. :roll: Taylor guitars is another company that spends a great deal protecting its design, mainly the name and headstock design of their instruments. I think they even had a banjo company, Rich and Taylor, change their name to protect the brand identity. Now, Martin guitars created the dreadnought acoustic model in the late 20's or early '30's, but they never stopped other companies from using the design. After millions of guitars were made in the dreadnought shape and style by other companies uncontested, Martin really can't go back and try to protect the shape as theirs. You snooze, you lose...
Keep in mind that doing it right is cheaper. I have some pcb layout designs licensed to a couple of boutique builders who have done modifications to them, so they're derivative work. I have also made a couple of layouts on demand for the same purpose.
A very good option is to contact the copyright owner himself and ask how much he would charge to license the design, it's often a very small fraction of the cost of the finished pedal.
Fp