The controversy - Page 3 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Amplifiers > Chip Amps

Chip Amps Amplifiers based on integrated circuits

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 8th July 2003, 11:44 PM   #21
bqc is offline bqc  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Peter, since you seem to be needing help in picking creative
name for your amp, how about organizing a amp naming contest
and whoever came up with a name that you selected, will
get a free amp
  Reply With Quote
Old 8th July 2003, 11:49 PM   #22
idex is offline idex  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: USA
Free, we can all dream can't we?


How about the winner gets to review the amp?
  Reply With Quote
Old 8th July 2003, 11:52 PM   #23
diyAudio Member
 
Steve Eddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Sacramento, CA
Quote:
Originally posted by Peter Daniel
In this case I'll name my product just Amp
Here's a bright idea with a nice French flair. Call it, L'Amp.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg lamp.jpg (16.8 KB, 611 views)
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th July 2003, 12:12 AM   #24
diyAudio Member
 
JordanG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Atlanta, GA
Quote:
Originally posted by Steve Eddy


Here's a bright idea with a nice French flair. Call it, L'Amp.

Uh oh, its already been done.

Click the image to open in full size.

--Jordan
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th July 2003, 12:13 AM   #25
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: LA
Amp Clone
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th July 2003, 12:48 AM   #26
lgreen is offline lgreen  United States
diyAudio Member
 
lgreen's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: San Diego, USA
Default Peter, No its not

Peter said:
Quote:
The parts choice I'm using is proprietary and that creates my design.
Well, its not proprietary any more. I think the point is anything may be copied, unless its:
1. patented, and to get one of those you need to come up with something new and nonobvious;
2. a trade secret or "proprietary" and to protect something here you need to keep it secret. The fact that the amp is capable of reverse engineering means its not secret and not protected by trade secret.
3. trade dress, meaning its appearance is associated with a source of the goods, i.e. a red wavy line on a soda bottle is associated with a company called Coke. Here 47 Labs has a unique trade dress associated with their company, its probably protectible, but the copy is not close enough (probably) to cause a problem.
4. Trademark-- only protects the name not the thing sold, so go ahead and change it if audiosource gets interested.

I think you are fine, good luck and nice work.
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th July 2003, 01:20 AM   #27
diyAudio Member
 
Steve Eddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Sacramento, CA
Quote:
Originally posted by JordanG
Uh oh, its already been done.
Well hell.

se
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th July 2003, 01:55 AM   #28
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: US
Quote:
Originally posted by randytsuch
According to his "review", the gaincard was better, but it did not say why.
but the same goes with the "best sounding resistor" crowd as well. There are just so many iterations of the design and it is hard to argue that the GainCard had the original idea in terms of schematics - that goes to National that had put the design in the public domain in the first place, .

It is the implementation that can be patented. and i think Peter has enough originality in his design not to worry about this non-sense.
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th July 2003, 02:09 AM   #29
jam is offline jam  United States
diyAudio Member
 
jam's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Auburn, CA, USA
How about calling it.....L' Toaster?

Jam
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 104710.jpg (12.2 KB, 490 views)
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th July 2003, 04:07 AM   #30
diyAudio Member
 
breguetphile's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Indiana, USA
Default yeah!

I posted on AA but all I have to say is that this is the easiest case to make. Somewhere in NYAGC you can find the clone that i built that looks exactly like this. except the tubing i found was 6"x2" cross section.

There are only 2 other facets that can be argued which is the circuit (which is a very basic op amp circuit) and parts selection (which peter daniel has done meticulously and documented extensively over hte last several months (year?)).

On another note (as i'm still on a high from it... ) I recently (last night) got engaged. Soon waf will potentially become part of my life... Arrgh!! She's worth it ;-). BUT.... it would be nice to have a purdy amp like the AMP-1 to avoid WAF problems (hint hint wedding present.... :-D ).

brent
__________________
Dawn: When men of reason go to bed. ~Ambrose Bierce
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Has anyone been keeping up on the 'New Sensor' Controversy? aletheian Tubes / Valves 19 21st December 2005 10:17 PM
ESS AMT 1 impedance controversy... Urloony Planars & Exotics 2 23rd February 2005 03:56 PM
the DVD format controversy Elkaid Everything Else 6 10th December 2003 12:58 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 08:12 PM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2