The Possible Future Of Diy Community

[AndriyOL]

Maybe every DIYer ever wants to have a legal protection for his work, not to pay any penny for registering a patent for his research. Perhaps you will say that this is impossible, some kind of fantasy or even dumb idea.
I can persuade you that this is not.
The problems of not easily obtainable copyright protection for DIY work, selling stuff based on a stolen DIY design (in full or in part) without permission could be solved shortly without extensive efforts.
All of what you need is to act cooperatively in a promoted way.
For reason just to save a time and not repeating of what have been written already, the author kindly ask you to read this thread at the following link and than continue the discussion if there will remain a necessity for it.

http://www.diyhifi.org/forums/viewto...&sd=a&start=15

Also, just for simplicity this is “Technical Discussions” article, thread “carlosfm's schematics”.

Disclaimer.
Propositions described by author in this thread are not aimed for any financial, business or other kind of benefits intended for its author. All have been done exclusively for DIY sake.

[wakibaki]

It's nice to get intellectual credit for an original idea or even recognition of a craftsmanlike job-of-work on a design, but I don't think you can in any way realistically demand it once you publish on the web.

Is it really desirable to attempt to professionalise DIY? I don't object to people turning their hobby into a business, but then it's not a hobby any more, is it?

Even Microsoft cannot completely protect their intellectual property. The music industry is fighting a rearguard action.

There are ways to protect yourself if you feel that others are taking unfair advantage of you; nothing will destroy a trader's reputation for integrity quicker than the revelation that they are a knowing plagiarist.

Nothing will destroy the free-sharing spirit of DIY quicker than an overweening propensity to resort to the law.

Originally posted by Stuart Brand
'..information wants to be free...'

[AndriyOL]

Seems like you didn't understand completely of what we have discussed about.
The main aim is to protect from unauthorized commercial use and not from DIY and thus personal use.
It's not a business, it's copyright, intellectual property. If one DIYer place his work on the web and others use it - there is no violation of copyright. But when he mentions "not for commercial use" however it is used in that way regardless of the caution - this is violation of copyright.
Microsoft has an ability to protect itself de jure, but perhaps not have the ability to do this de facto.
DIYers don't have nor first nor second.
I have nothing to protect something which is mine. I'm not a technician at all.
The primary and solely aim is to prove, to assert the free-sharing spirit of DIY and not to destroy it!!!

I guess you understand all in an opposite direction and created nothing or worth trying like me?!!!

That's why information must be free for those to whom it is designated!!!

[jan.didden]

Well, one of the big problems is: what is what you call 'research'. I guess you refer to Carlos' snubber stuff? While I want in no way to detract from Carlos' ingenuity, snubbers, and how to calculate them, and what they do, are all over the 'net since several decades. So, what is it that needs to be 'protected'?

At any rate, if you post your work on a diy forum on the internet, you lose all control over it. Think about that before you publish. That's reality, and no amount of arguing will change that or convince anyone to NOT use your 'design' when it seems handy.

Jan Didden

[AndriyOL]

Carlos schematics it is what the discussion have started, not more. Than we referred to work protection.
But the main of what I promote is professional alliance.
One who doesn't want to share his work - doesn't post it. If posted - you can use it. You are DIYer. It's not a business.

[jam]

Jan is correct here, if you throw out there it is likely to be copied. You can protect yourself by not publishing it but by the same token if everyone has that attitude nobody gains. How many of you have used a Wilson Mirror, for example, did any of you send Mr.Wilson rolalties..........you might consider this a bad example, but follow that line of thought and you will see what I mean.I have no ill will towards Carlos, if fact he is a fine human being and very talented I wish I could say the same for some of his associates.

I used to be a member of the other site and all the moderators and some unamed members whined about is how someone else had stolen their ides, so in turn they did not contibute much, and if you did they jumped on your case and said you were sharing too much information. Why even bother starting a forum with a buit in Catch-22.

All of us are guilty of copying elements of someone else's work in our designs, that being said, I do not condone wholesale copying,and credit should be given where it is due. My two cents.

Jam

[wakibaki]

Originally posted by AndriyOL
I guess you ... created nothing ... like me?!!!

...and if I had created nothing, would that invalidate my argument?

...and given that you've created nothing, what's your percentage?

w

Apochrypal
Laws are for the guidance of wise men, and the obediance of fools.

[scott wurcer]

Originally posted by AndriyOL
Seems like you didn't understand completely of what we have discussed about.
The main aim is to protect from unauthorized commercial use and not from DIY and thus personal use.
It's not a business, it's copyright, intellectual property. If one DIYer place his work on the web and others use it - there is no violation of copyright. But when he mentions "not for commercial use" however it is used in that way regardless of the caution - this is violation of copyright.
Microsoft has an ability to protect itself de jure, but perhaps not have the ability to do this de facto.
DIYers don't have nor first nor second.
I have nothing to protect something which is mine. I'm not a technician at all.
The primary and solely aim is to prove, to assert the free-sharing spirit of DIY and not to destroy it!!!

I guess you understand all in an opposite direction and created nothing or worth trying like me?!!!

That's why information must be free for those to whom it is designated!!!

Andriy,

This has been discussed at length before. Machines and devices are protected by patents and international treaties to recognize them. Copyrights have absolutely nothing to do with protecting circuit innovations. Copyrighting a schematic means that someone may not take that that drawing and reproduce it. The law actually protects the right of someone to reverse engineer a product, generate a schematic, and start cloning it. There are trademarks and design patents that complicate the issue, but in general a cloned circuit is perfectly legal (and exact copy of a board layout may also fall under copyright law, IC layouts do as maskwork). If it is not patented the inventor has no recourse AFAIK. You are talking about rewriting the laws in many countries, the energy is better spent elsewhere.

This stuff often places the moderators of DIY boards in tough situations. If a member buys a kit and traces out the circuit and posts it on their web site. The person selling the kit actually has no business demanding that it be taken down or having that person banned. We basically just rely on the good will and mutual respect of fellow members.

We discussed this at Burning Amp. I don’t think mixing commercial interests and DIY is a great idea. It creates a grey area of people making up rules that have no legal basis and hard feelings all around.

[SY]

And, it should be said, there's no real money to be made in this anyway.

[scott wurcer]

I might also add that the guys at diyhi.org are laboring under some completely unfounded misconceptions about IP. It might feel like the "right thing" to them but it has no basis in reality. So my advice is, everything you post is a complete give away, period, for anyone to do whatever they wish with it.