MA Alpair 7.3 In Pencils VS MA Alpair 7.3 In FHMK.3

[Colin]

I can see that Wilmslow might need to do that but I wouldn't have thought it necessary for a joiner to worry about licensing as a one-off commission.

I haven't read the copyright terms for the design so worth checking.

 

[giulio]

It says "All rights reserved
NOT for commercial use without prior
written approval from Markimage Limited"

I would not expect that ruling out cutting wood to measure for a single individual...

 

[Bob Brines]

Here's the way I look at it:

I sell you a set of plans. I have my license fee. If you want to build the speakers yourself or if you want to pay someone else to do the work, I don't care.

If you want to do serial production for sale, I expect you to buy a set of plans for each pair of speakers you build. In effect, you pay a license fee for each pair.

I don't give away free plans, so this is not an issue to me. If I did, I would expect a license fee if you outshop the work. Otherwise, you do it yourself or pay me to do the work.

Bob

 

[giulio]

Here's the way I look at it:
I don't give away free plans, so this is not an issue to me. If I did, I would expect a license fee if you outshop the work. Otherwise, you do it yourself or pay me to do the work.

Bob

Where does this stop given that the plans are online? Having a full flat pack made? It seems to me both reasonable and appropriate to draw the line there.

Or does it go as far as requiring a license fee for having the wood cut even if you route the holes? (Or do you have to laminate the ply too for it not to be considered a commercial use ?) But then one wonders why posting the plans at all?

Giulio

 

[Bob Brines]

Come on, Giulio,you have to apply some common sense. If the third party is making a substantial (whatever that means to you) profit, then a license is required. Having the lumberyard cut up the sheet goods for free or a nominal fee, license wouldn't apply. However, if the baffle is routed, holes in braces made, etc., a license would apply. I sell flats and I do place a value on my time.

In my case, though, the above doesn't apply, because you DID buy the plans. And, I don't recommend that you mold your lumber out of Plastic Wood!

Bob

 

[giulio]

Bob,

I think we are in agreement.

Basically, all I am saying is that cutting wood panels to the required accuracy is outside the skill/tool combination available to the average diyer.

Giulio

P.S. I plead guilty of threadjacking. It would be a good idea to prune the last few posts.

 

[planet10]

For the Pensils, i don't see Mark not giving permission for a single build, for someone commercial like Wilmslow who already builds flat-paks, and would not likely tool up for just 1 pair i'd expect them to get licenced up.

For the FH3 a one-off would be OK, many more and it would be time to licence up. BTW for FH3, the only money that flows is to Martin King for a one-time commercial licence.

For Pensil an MJK licence is also required for commercail, i don't know if Mark would ask for more, as each pair made represents driver sales.

dave

 

[chrisb]

Bob,

I think we are in agreement.

Basically, all I am saying is that cutting wood panels to the required accuracy is outside the skill/tool combination available to the average diyer.

some of us (myself included) are fortunate enough to have access to commercial grade workshops, and sure the talent of an "average" DIYer will fit somewhere a a bell curve, but your above comment could be considered somewhat condescending if not insulting to those who achieve amazing results pictured on many of these fora with "rudimentary" tool-kits

if the resolution on CAD dimensions was set to "0" decimal point, with the note "cut to dry fit" on something like the FH3 for example, would a successful project with hand fabricated parts speak to higher or lower skill-set by the builder than an all CNC machined flat pack?

sorry for the pi$$y tone

Giulio

P.S. I plead guilty of threadjacking. It would be a good idea to prune the last few posts.

so far no blood on the floor, and not really all that far off topic, so I think the exchange still has legs

 

[Bob Brines]

....For Pensil an MJK licence is also required for commercail, i don't know if Mark would ask for more, as each pair made represents driver sales.

dave

I asked Mark that question, and he gave me the go-ahead for at least one build. But I DID ask, and of course, I have a MJK commercial license.

Bob

 

[markaudio]

Hi Guys,
Pensil plans for home use (non-commercial purposes) are free. Either built by yourself or using a professional maker is fine. Any commercial purpose (making Pensils for re-sale, profit), needs Markaudio's permission, please contact me first.

There's a growing number of free plans. I think Dave's (Planet 10) site offer the most choice. Thanks for his efforts to make many plans freely available, and a modest charge for other plans that took him time to develop.

We are getting closer to completing the new Markaudio site (sorry its taking so long) including a section for publishing plans.

Thanks
Mark.

 

[Colin]

Mark's licensing arrangement is what I would expect and is pretty similar to that given at the end of some of the designs published in magazines. It gives the originator of the design not only fair income but some control over what happens to the design - e.g. it prevents someone modifying it and then going into production and claiming it's the same as the original.

Regarding DIY - it is difficult for a lot of people to accurately cut and route panels, not necessarily because of lack of skill but due to space and facilities.

For some inexplicable reason, partners tend to be less than impressed at speakers-in-progress cluttering up the kitchen for days on end.

 

[GM]

Never had that particular problem with the 'better half', but she took extreme exception to using sinks, bathtub as vehicle/whatever parts cleaning 'tanks', no matter how well I cleaned up afterwards......... Fortunately, a short trip on the cycle would normally get me back in her 'good graces'.

GM