Bricolo said:what's the difference between giving it for free, and selling the cd?
jean-paul said:If it would be original manufacturers PDF files it would be different.
jacco vermeulen said:I can not imagine anyone from the old French crew objecting to that, so why should the Eindhoven blokes do, its good advertising of the brand.
jacco vermeulen said:I just realised i am surrounded by Philips labels.
Even my audio-labor table is former Philips laboratory equipment, my variac has the Philips logo, the scope.
When i try to relax, go down to the living and switch on the tv, its also Philips everywhere staring at me.
SY said:Carlos, our policy about copyright is quite clear. Philips is the copyright holder and has not yet given permission for reproduction. What is unclear about this?
carlosfm said:Now this goes to the moderators:
Let me say that when I first saw electropt's thread in Texas I didn't understand what happened.
The moderators should have posted the reason for moving the thread to Texas.
SY said:Philips is the copyright holder, not electropt. Why is this unclear to you?
The other thread was moved to Texas only after i had contacted electropt and he made it clear that that repository had been cut-off and that the thread was essentially dead. It went to Texas because i didn't want it to completely disappear.
As to electropt's question about my offer to host, i have a number of service manuals with no copyright... as soon as i would have seen the Philips copyright on the 1st manual i would no longer be willing to host without formal approval from the copyright holder.