If you see an infringement by showing his product, show us a registered design claim. Oh, there is non? So that reduces the territory of a "copyright claim" to a very small space, think "tip of a needle". As "showing the product" is for reporting and educational use here, there is no case in this corner of the universe.
There are only so many possible designs of circuits possible; there are only a few possible components having being selected for this circuit design - think of "fit for purpose". If have no doubt, that the circuits as a whole or parts have been published before. Even by the manufacturers of the parts. "Reverse engineering" therefor is just reenacting the layout proposal original done by the manufacturer. Which also helped to identify the anonymized parts.
This is not patentable rocket science, it is just a recreation of the circuits proposed by the manufacturers, both by Tom and Mark.
And note that the copyright to Marks documents is not to the circuit, but to the document itself, which is a huge difference.
On that matter, the PCB design is copyrighted work, the circuit itself is not
There is just no "mistake" on Marks side of the story. I'd certainly donate some money to battle this out in court, should Tom want to go that way.
LOL - Yet one more video commentary addressing the Tom Evans/Mend-it-Mark PR Fiasco, and the related YouTube lack of the most basic diligence regarding copyright claims. It even touches on the video commentary regarding the fiasco by Louis Rossman.
Last edited:
Wow. The Internet is doing Internet things... 🙂
Ultimately, sunlight is the best disinfectant.
Tom
Ultimately, sunlight is the best disinfectant.
Tom
I know, but unless I could deeplink them, I will not download and upload them as my own. (Not that*I* do care, if someone is doing this with my stuff, but others might care.)
On topic: This looks like a nice build indeed, but I guess my XONO clone has to be good enough for me. On the other hand - if a donor is able to part from some pocket money (100k or so should do), why not 🙂
Note: I think that tube stuff overcomplicates things, for likely only "it has tubes!"-reasons. So solid state it is for me...
Wow - you are correct (I am wrong), I must say that Mark is rather impressive
WHAT! Someone admitting he is WRONG on the Internet!?
HERETIC! APOSTATE! PASTRY-FONDLER!
HERETIC! APOSTATE! PASTRY-FONDLER!
Mend it Mark is one of the most likeable electronics repair guys on Youtube. He is a skilled tech an I love all his videos because of the love and workmanship he puts in his repairs and the way he films and narrates them. Meanwhile, Tom Evans thought it was a good idea to have his video on this preamp pulled because of supposed copyright infringement, to the outrage of many of his colleagues on Youtube. The video has been re-uploaded by dozens of Youtubers over the past days and Tom Evans now has to deal with the Streisand effect. Bad decision!
If you all forgive in advance the modest point of view of an amateur (me) who has nothing to do with the design and even less with the repair of audio equipment, I would like to say for what it's worth the thoughts that this very representative photo has brought out in me and the fact that all your and interesting opinions of (almost) all of you have told me (who am outside of all this) how much this type of thing has its own craftsmanship - and therefore its own "humanity" - which is very varied, and therefore a high percentage of intuition and error too.
This is why those who affirm anything are often asked for absolute answers, tried and proven by experts who have left an appreciated mark in this world, because the level of uncertainty present in every human enterprise is not low.
Even today, the skill of a technician, who in reality is a true craftsman in the best possible sense of the term, is rare and not to be taken for granted.
And it is "almost" exactly the same as for the design of a good circuit, where "good" implies not only good measurements, but above all good sound.
Oversights in the diagrams, the replacements of one component with another, the convictions that everything has been done well even if the results say otherwise make those "few" who really emerge almost mythological characters.
May be everything starts from that, in my very humble opinion.
Let's be clear, that's fine, this is the state of the art of this hobby/work, if we exclude the high-level industries that hire swarms of engineers to obtain a final product of very high quality and error-proof (I don't know why Accuphase came to mind) which is never "truly" error-proof because that is innate in human nature.
That's why in so much craftsmanship, even the measurements are "artisanal" in the sense of what and how to measure and above all how to interpret those measurements are subject to a high (?) degree of possibility of error.
That's why the photograph of that technician who looks like a surgeon in his operating room inspires such feelings, at least in me, or maybe in anyone.
Wow, that's certainly broadened my spectrum of verbal opprobrium! Never thought of shouting that one. Steak and kidney pie, or what?
I have been watching mend it Mark for a long time , and am amazed at his skills, brilliant. However he made a big mistake of reverse engineering and creating that document containing diagrams, and sticking his logo on the same document. That document alone would have pissed off a lot of manufactures. The document look great but should never have been displayed in his video. And as for scraping the Id's off of IC's its very common, making the design more difficult to copy, rather than hindering repair. What I would like to see now is that Mend It Mark make a copyright claim against all channels that have uploaded his videos , that would be really funny.
You are totally missing the point. The manufacturer did not provide a service manual or schematics with the phono stage, The reverse engineered manual and schematics are the copyright property of Mark (or "Bodge it Mark in an email from the manufacturer).
In fact the term "Bodge it Mark" is itself potentially libelous. Libel being "a published false statement that is damaging to a person's reputation".
In fact the term "Bodge it Mark" is itself potentially libelous. Libel being "a published false statement that is damaging to a person's reputation".
- Status
- Not open for further replies.