Super Regulator, IP sidetrack

[Fred Dieckmann]

I don't do free consulting for potential commercial products. It is a simple circuit and well within your ability to prototype. I actually do have all the Audio Amateur articles describing the evolution from the original Sultzer regulator to the final Jung regulator. but posting would be a copyright violation. I believe Andy (ALW) has read them as well. The AD797 is really not a good op amp for this circuit.

[PMA]

Fred, I did try to find out more about you. Here is the result from DIYaudio database: na, na, na, na. Very interesting!

Maybe Alcatel?

[Fred Dieckmann]

"I have no trouble at all to give free consulting for commercial interests as long as it costs me nothing."

You know what they say...... The problem with free advice is you get what you pay for.

I actually have offered free advice on the forum that has been used for financial profit. I now offer the real advice by Email to my DIY friends who show some gratitude and teach me things as well. I hope they will continue that dialog, that has been fun and educational for me. I really have no problem offering advice to those who are willing to do a little research and show some initiative to learn more. That's the reason for the many links references and articles. There many things that are just beyond the scope of a forum. I have seen many unpleasant insults and pointless arguments by people who don't understand the level of technical understanding of some of the topics under discussion. The person providing the most insight and knowledge often winds up receiving the most abuse.

[Peter Daniel]

Originally posted by Fred Dieckmann
but posting would be a copyright violation

It seems strange that suddenly you've changed your views on copyright violations. Unless not using a real name makes you feel better about it.

Voltage regulators for line level circuits

[grataku]

Fred,
we now you don't like per-anders much...is this a warning for other people not to help?
I know you like to talk behind peoples back about them, you did that with me, not that I care.
I am happy that you got what you wanted out of this site: a circle of friends with which exchange ideas and suggestions.
You are probably right to be annoyed as a matter of principle however, discussion benefits everybody not only per-anders. Actually if more people acquired the knowhow there would be less need for the fringe commercial activities that you dislike so much.
There are much more serious issues to be ****ed about, bigger fish that are driving SL500 they bought with the money they stole from me (and you).

[Fred Dieckmann]

Technically you are right, but the circuit is public domain and is out of a hobbyist magazine. A similar circuit has been published by Mr. Jung as a circuit, idea for free use, in another magazine. I believe that the circuit is pretty well established as public domain. I am fairly sure Mr. Jung is even aware of a commercial version or two of his regulators being sold and has no problem. I will try draw my own schematics of public domain circuits in the future rather than copy from a magazine. I think if you have problems with circuits from hobbyist magazines, you need to go back and pull at least a hundred schematics from the forum for the last year. If it was considered copyright violation, why did the moderators allow it to be posted? I would also remind people that what they post here of their own work and experience can and has been used for others financial gain. I don't think many who post here think about this, or would be pleased with the with the abuse of advice that was offered for the use of other hobbyist. I have offered advice to a few people selling things. But with the clear understanding that it's use was allowed in a commercial product. In return I have been privy to design details not intended for release to others and have respected that.

Peter, I must say a lecture on intellectual property, from you, is delightfully ironic.... I may have a little more to say later on the encroaching commercial abuse of the forum, to all the members detriment, later in another thread. Must obnoxious of all people that turn around a try to use the forum to sell products via the very forum where they got the knowledge to design it. All of us hate junk mail and unsolicited phone calls trying to sell us something. Is the forum going to become another place were someone is going to sell us something? The whole idea of do it yourself audio was to escape the BS claims of much commercial audio. Are now going to have to examine everything we read here to have commercial motivations behind it.

There are plenty who post here, who manage to sell audio products without abusing the forum to do it. A few of the real good guys bend over backwards not to, and have my greatest respect and willingness to discuss audio design. These discussions belong behind the scenes where motivation, possible commercial use, and discretion are understood up front.

[peranders]

Originally posted by Fred Dieckmann
"I have no trouble at all to give free consulting for commercial interests as long as it costs me nothing."

That's the reason for the many links references and articles. There many things that are just beyond the scope of a forum. I have seen many unpleasant insults and pointless arguments by people who don't understand the level of technical understanding of some of the topics under discussion.

Searching can be real hard, but you seems to have skills in that department. We have all here different levels of information collection skills so a shortcut from somebody who knows is very welcome. I think everyone here prefer an answer plus maybe a link, not the other way around.

About abusing and insulting, you seem to have forgotten your own talents in this area. Now Fred, cheer up and forget that some people here are at a lower level than yourself.

[peranders]

Fred, I don't how it is USA but here you get a patent for something you want to protect but otherwise, I don't know if you can claim any other rights, if we only talk about a circuit. Can you copyright a circuit? Don't think so.

Intellectual property, what is this really, legally?

[Fred Dieckmann]

"I know you like to talk behind peoples back about them, you did that with me, not that I care. "

I believe I have been very clear of my feelings about most individuals right here in public in the light. After some of the things that have been said in public, I can't imagine that they held much back for private discussions. Are people calling me worse things than a terrorist (thanks Mr. G) behind the scenes? The Audio Antichrist seems to be about the only thing left for those of you who have run out of invectives. I am disappointed by the very small amount of hate mail I receive. Once again for those who would like to vent:

fdieck7800@aol.com

[SY]

You can copyright a drawing of a circuit, but cannot copyright a circuit. If it's sufficiently novel and you want to take the trouble, you can patent it. If not, and you publish a drawing, the circuit is in the public domain (but not that specific drawing, which can be copyrighted).

Fuzzier issues concern fair use- can someone post a copyrighted schematic drawing for the purposes of analysis and discussion? Gray area.