First off I really want this to get somewhere. It's not just a rant!
Do you want somewhere to get very well made boards for your audio projects?
Well I can't really understand why people have gripes about some Chinese board manufacturers on ebay making PCBs for the likes of the Pass labs F5 and such. People say that these people are profiting from Nelsons designs without his permission, but they are essentially providing people the opportunity to build their own F5 amp and enjoy what Nelson has given the community. By no means am I saying that we should be ungreatful for Pass' designs by buying from them.
Instead of having to make minor changes to make their boards different from the original designs why not get something sorted so that these board manufacturers and make the boards to original spec?
Why pass up this great resource? They are great prices, great quality and fast delivery with the security of ebay and paypal.
I intend to get into contact with jims audio (a seller on ebay) and the likes of DX (and others) to see if there could be some deal so that we can get 'original desgin' boards with perhaps an added cost to go to the amp designers? If this contribution stops going to the designers we'll simply stop buying from them if you feel it's the right thing to do.
Of course I'm only going to do this if there is enough interest because it's going to have to be worth while for the manufacturer. If people are interested I need to get some backing in order to do this. In the future we could even get a few amp boards on the go with them perhaps.
I'm going to send them a message tomorrow just to see if they would be interested what so ever and see where it goes.
Please give your opinions and such, I hope this could be a good partnership although it has only just started!
Please vote in the poll so I can get an idea of peoples general opinion.
Thanks Boscoe
Do you want somewhere to get very well made boards for your audio projects?
Well I can't really understand why people have gripes about some Chinese board manufacturers on ebay making PCBs for the likes of the Pass labs F5 and such. People say that these people are profiting from Nelsons designs without his permission, but they are essentially providing people the opportunity to build their own F5 amp and enjoy what Nelson has given the community. By no means am I saying that we should be ungreatful for Pass' designs by buying from them.
Instead of having to make minor changes to make their boards different from the original designs why not get something sorted so that these board manufacturers and make the boards to original spec?
Why pass up this great resource? They are great prices, great quality and fast delivery with the security of ebay and paypal.
I intend to get into contact with jims audio (a seller on ebay) and the likes of DX (and others) to see if there could be some deal so that we can get 'original desgin' boards with perhaps an added cost to go to the amp designers? If this contribution stops going to the designers we'll simply stop buying from them if you feel it's the right thing to do.
Of course I'm only going to do this if there is enough interest because it's going to have to be worth while for the manufacturer. If people are interested I need to get some backing in order to do this. In the future we could even get a few amp boards on the go with them perhaps.
I'm going to send them a message tomorrow just to see if they would be interested what so ever and see where it goes.
Please give your opinions and such, I hope this could be a good partnership although it has only just started!
Please vote in the poll so I can get an idea of peoples general opinion.
Thanks Boscoe
Perhaps it isn't right to steal other people's work, but most of the designers aren't manufacturing boards for sale, so they aren't really competing with what they stole. It's a great resource. I think if the designers of these DIY-type PCBs really want to make money, they should start selling boards themselves and offer some other amenities.
Unless the designer has clearly indicated that the design is freely available for use sans restrictions that person ought to be able to dictate under what conditions that design may be used, and what if any compensation he might want for his work.
It is unlikely that these manufacturers have asked for permission to profit from the work done by others, think about how you feel about getting paid for the work you do.. (Do you like essentially working for free?)
There are lots of designer sanctioned non-profit group buys here already, why not arrange one of those with the permission of the designer in question? In terms of licensing fees if necessary you should probably collect them yourself and pay the designer - in most cases as long as no profit is involved there may be no issue. (And there are lots of PCB design and fab houses in China that have nothing to do with this trade - I'd use one of them.)
It is unlikely that these manufacturers have asked for permission to profit from the work done by others, think about how you feel about getting paid for the work you do.. (Do you like essentially working for free?)
There are lots of designer sanctioned non-profit group buys here already, why not arrange one of those with the permission of the designer in question? In terms of licensing fees if necessary you should probably collect them yourself and pay the designer - in most cases as long as no profit is involved there may be no issue. (And there are lots of PCB design and fab houses in China that have nothing to do with this trade - I'd use one of them.)
Arguments based on 'ought' are moral arguments. Why should others adhere to your morals? They're a cultural thing, and in the case of the Western legal system there's recourse under law for people who ignore this.
I agree, but then why should they? If its only a moral argument you're giving then morals are a private affair. Or a religious one.
I do give away the designs that I do. And no, giving away designs is not 'working for free'. That's because designs often need support, and support is always paid for. Even if someone does not require support they are still propagating my designs. Why do you think Paulo Coelho encourages his books to be copied?
I simply send pcb files and get pcbs back as per files, not sure what other support i would need.
I'm pretty sure we are talking about premade boards, like for amplifiers and preamps and stuff. Not your own schematic.
Not quite sure why pcb manufacturers are getting slated here.
Its usually electronics companies or DIYers that rip off pcb's and circuits.
So how do you claim damage in an openly published and in the pass case encouraged to build at home license free design?
How can ip possibly be violated if the owners of the ip isn't asserting that right?
I've yet to see any one of the designers asset damage claims, in fact most seems happy to see that their ideas spread (the altuistid side of diy appeals to me btw). arguing that someone who is making some of these designs more accessible is hence an ip infringer seems like a unsubstantiated argument since the designs appears to be provided royalty free, and the provider is making no assertion of ownership of the design, bur rather is asking for a profit of the service of making the design accessible.
If the ip owner would be asserting their ip rights then the whole notion of diy seems to be flawed as well. These fringe businesses aren't exactly profiting by taking money from the designers, they are merely taking profit from making the design more accessible. Is that really theft?
How can ip possibly be violated if the owners of the ip isn't asserting that right?
I've yet to see any one of the designers asset damage claims, in fact most seems happy to see that their ideas spread (the altuistid side of diy appeals to me btw). arguing that someone who is making some of these designs more accessible is hence an ip infringer seems like a unsubstantiated argument since the designs appears to be provided royalty free, and the provider is making no assertion of ownership of the design, bur rather is asking for a profit of the service of making the design accessible.
If the ip owner would be asserting their ip rights then the whole notion of diy seems to be flawed as well. These fringe businesses aren't exactly profiting by taking money from the designers, they are merely taking profit from making the design more accessible. Is that really theft?
The ones that have half a clue about marketing do, yes. They call them 'reference designs'. They realise that customers are in need of solutions, not just products.
It's just not that simple, SY, intellectual property is a legal invention. Before the introduction of patent law you could either keep what you discovered a secret, or expose it without recourse if someone else exploited it.
Now, it's arguable that societal benefit flows from the existence of IP law, but it's not a law of nature, any more than conventional property law. It's not without reason that Pierre-Joseph Proudhon coined the expression 'Property is Theft'. It's naiive to view this as merely moral relativism.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.