In a thread I created about simulating a dying battery with a LM317 voltage regulator circuit someone pointed out that someone holds a patent on the circuit. My question is, does this mean that I cannot use a similar circuit and sell it? Is it even defendable for the patent holder? I know lawyers will charge you lots of money to do just about anything, but in the end can you even defend something like this?
For instance, can you change the values of the components and have a "different" circuit? Can you attach the circuit to another circuit thereby creating a "different" circuit?
If not, what's stopping someone from patenting a typical pull down resistor design and then attempting to sue every builder who uses one to avoid pop in their pedal?
I realize the that DIY community is a small one that many people have leared from, contributed to, and to some extent, stolen from. I mean, everything is derivative in some sense.
Anyhow, I would love to hear your thoughts...
You can get away with just about anything if your smart enough, take Amplifier's for instance, if there was not such a thing as bending the rule's a little bit there would only be a Fender amp for sale in your local music store, for one reason, if you get to know the amp circuit you woyld instantly reconize the circuit's Leo used when you open up any other tube amp, same circuit, just afew change's,, this is not implying that Leo was the first to build a tube amp, He was not, His was just one of the first that met with public success, and the story goes on and on, in just about any industry, if not for these people that bend the rules, there would be no new invention's or refinement of said circuit's, so be a Smart guy and clone your Screamer, just don't paint it green and don't call it a T-S9, LOL !, and if anybody ask's, just lie like HELL and Plead STUPIDITY !,
:shock: :( :( :(
JD
I think what is law in one country is not necessarily law in another country, unless of course the law was made in the former colony of Great Britain now known as the USA, which will now apply everywhere else on the planet. What you have to say to yourself is - can I sleep at night doing this? Ah, I need to go and turn my Led Zeppelin bootleg LP over.
QuoteIf not, what's stopping someone from patenting a typical pull down resistor design and then attempting to sue every builder who uses one to avoid pop in their pedal?
because it`s already known to those skilled in the art...
you can get a patent for s.th. new, aka: invention - not for s.th. that is already being done by others..
QuoteFor instance, can you change the values of the components and have a "different" circuit? Can you attach the circuit to another circuit thereby creating a "different" circuit?
that, what makes a circuit unique, is stated in the "claims" of a patent application (and mostly, it`s not component values...)
Quote from: zenpeace69In a thread I created about simulating a dying battery with a LM317 voltage regulator circuit someone pointed out that someone holds a patent on the circuit. My question is, does this mean that I cannot use a similar circuit and sell it?
From what I gather the patented circuit is a copy of a design RG posted. In theory it's worthless if this is the case as the design was in the 'public domain' long before a patent was applied for.
Ask RG's permission? :)
Better be glad they had no copywrite law's back in the dark ages, we'd all be paying NostraDamus a wheelbarrow load a money just to be on line, LOL !
and while were at it, let's just copywrite the whole world, makes it easier, to not invent anything, we can all just lay under the same Ol' big oaktree and get Fat and Lazy.
:lol: :lol:
JD
Well I'm no lawyer but I would say rather than listen to me and a bunch of other folks who don't really know 100% for sure I would read some of these documents.
http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/consolidated_laws.pdf
http://www.nolo.com/lawcenter/ency/article.cfm/ObjectID/B1EDE764-1F7D-472B-92E4197921C56A8E/catID/21B0B82E-AFD4-4452-85E9E85A1E836322
http://www.nolo.com/lawcenter/index.cfm/catid/FD8C060B-5DD4-4809-A53ECCF6BBD87E32
http://www.law.cornell.edu/topics/patent.html
http://www.ipwatchdog.com/patent.html
Then decide for your self. Also I would say just because you have a patent lawyer don't mean jack sh*t. Not all lawyers are created equal. If your fellow man has a better lawyer or his lawyer makes a better arguement, well then SOL.
What little I read off the UPTO website I would say go for it. Someone may get their lawyer on you but that don't mean squat. Lawyers sue people all the time knowing that they are going to lose or that they have no case. Why? Cause they get paid anyway! :lol:
Really! Just sit down one day. Set a couple hours aside. Then read through all those websites. Make your self a talking points paper and teach yourself. I didn't say you have to commit it to memory. Just make up a list and talking points of the info you need. Then just keep it on file somewhere and when another arguement or discussion comes up on this forum or another or with a friend just go reference your little file you made for yourself.
Those legal regs aren't really that long or that much in content. Most of it I saw is stupid bullshit like the duties of the officers, salary info, chain of command etc. etc.. The part you need to read wasn't that much. As with all government stuff yo have to wade through tons of BS to get the answer. That is just part of living in the USA with the Fed. :D
I'm in!!! As long as the big oaktree is next to a river in the South and I gots my pole and a cooler full of beer!!! Let's throw in an ol blue tick to lay there and keep us company and bark at all the catfish or crappie we catch! Damn I'm homesick!!!!!!!!! :cry:
The patent office is supposedly so stupid you can likely submit some foms for the same exact circuit and get your patent.
Did RGs thing predate the battman?
Here is the truth as I see it, I stole the quote!
"I know that there is no intellectual property in the simple knowledge that phase, amplitude and frequency within an analog circuit can be manipulated, for instance, through the use of diodes, transistors, inductors and capacitors acting alone or arranged in various combinations. Further, the degree to which this is true is well understood and documented. It can be calculated with reasonable accuracy. In that these factors can be calculated, the results might be novel, even ingenious but they are not technically unique. Not trivial, not mundane, but not unique.
So, while the non-technical and interested party may view the activity and results of component selection as one of discovery and creativity, the engineer sees it as simply a calculation successfully executed â€" one that verifies a known relationship.
Because this is true, no “protection†is deserved, indeed, it is not owed nor should it be sought on any grounds insofar as we are talking about the technical fundamentals of the “circuitâ€.
Of course, this is a position viewed solely from the technical perspective.
If you take that “circuitâ€, package it in a hand painted box, give it a cool name and market it for what it is - a unique package; I also say you are entitled to all the protection the law will provide. If I forge that “product†and attempt to sell it as yours â€" misrepresenting its origin â€" I am guilty of that, not the violation of any rights in technical design."
But really you would be a naughty little boy and someone would surely send out their lawyers to cick you.
What is funny is how many times I see someoen ask a question, come around to a proposed solution and then either RG or Snowberg or someone else jumops up and say "Wow I have been working on this exact circuit and idea!"
Too @#$%ing funny if you ask me.
At that point does RG rush to the shop to get to work so HE can secure the patent?
Doesn't it just smack of "how the hell can you be the only one to ever come up with this idea if you are having the same *good* ideas that every 100th forum member has?
It's pretty rich. :D :D
Arggh... I hate that my first post here has to be about patent law, but I just can't pass. My observations:
1. You can defend against it by showing prior art, but you probably can't afford to defend against it.
2. Patents seldom protect those with only a few of them. Large companies (IBM comes to mind) use their many patents to force cross-licensing of other patents... If you find they are infringing one of your patents, their team of lawyers point out several of their patents your device is infringing.
Here's an article on basic patent law:
http://www.autm.net/patent/nacua.html
For my money, they've been given too freely by the USPTO and are hindering rather than promoting the advancement of science, especially in the field of computer science. That, of course, doesn't entitle me to infringe someone's patent, but it does give me yet another reason to write my congress-critter .
*Note*: IANAL; This post is my opinon and should not be taken as legal advice... :roll:
here's some reading 4 ya'all---
this is from the Famous Don Lancaster, TTL and CMOS Guru--
http://www.tinaja.com/glib/casagpat.pdf
from his website here---
http://www.tinaja.com/patnt01.asp
there's a couple more articles as well.
well worth reading.
JustBuildIt!!
tone
QuoteFurther, the degree to which this is true is well understood and documented.
Because people (who couldn`t google that all up...)
have spent a big part of their lifetime finding out all of that
almost hundred years ago, and
DISCLOSED that in
e.g. letters of patent.
If they hadn`t done so, and only would have built a product according
to their inventions for themselves and friends and neighours,
none of the big companies would have come across their findings,
and you`d not be sitting in front of a tube (or LCD/TFT-panel)
reading this, and be able to respond to the rest of the world...