Recently I found an interesting bluetooth speaker design which was a kind of transmission line built from plywood laminations. The design came from a kickstarter page that even had a nice 3d cutaway image of the lamination layers. Cool.
So I figured the dimensions that I wanted and drew the design from scratch into CAD, then created the enclosure by CNC out of MDF.
The end result looks very close to the design I saw depicted on the google images although I added tweeters and crossovers to the design and removed the volume control.
I am just wondering how IP law would apply to such a creation and how it affects what we do with respect to DIY and clones.
1. The design images were freely available on the internet, published by the creator via Kickstarter
2. The copy is a one-off for educational / personal use and not for commercial reproduction
3. The design is 'patent pending' although I am unsure what aspect is 'original design' - maybe just the shape?
At what point does IP infringment occur?
If I were to share the recipe for a cake that I intended to patent, would it be a fair expectation that others may make their own version of that cake? Would I have any legal recourse?
So I figured the dimensions that I wanted and drew the design from scratch into CAD, then created the enclosure by CNC out of MDF.
The end result looks very close to the design I saw depicted on the google images although I added tweeters and crossovers to the design and removed the volume control.
I am just wondering how IP law would apply to such a creation and how it affects what we do with respect to DIY and clones.
1. The design images were freely available on the internet, published by the creator via Kickstarter
2. The copy is a one-off for educational / personal use and not for commercial reproduction
3. The design is 'patent pending' although I am unsure what aspect is 'original design' - maybe just the shape?
At what point does IP infringment occur?
If I were to share the recipe for a cake that I intended to patent, would it be a fair expectation that others may make their own version of that cake? Would I have any legal recourse?
If the drawings don't have copyright messages on them I would suggest the yare free to use as you like.
Alternatively get in touch with the designer and ask permission.
I got permission to copy the Maplin 50 watt hi fi amplifier from the 1980's just by asking.
They said it was fine so long as I didn't mention Maplin when selling it as they didn't want to have to deal with people trying to return them !
Alternatively get in touch with the designer and ask permission.
I got permission to copy the Maplin 50 watt hi fi amplifier from the 1980's just by asking.
They said it was fine so long as I didn't mention Maplin when selling it as they didn't want to have to deal with people trying to return them !
IP infringement only occurs if you try to make money off it.
Otherwise it is public art.
You are not subject to copyright laws if you redraw the images yourself.
If you intend to patent it and have not filed a preliminary filing and reveal it publicly, you can not get a patent in the USA. Don't even talk to anyone about it without a Non Disclosure Agreement.
"Patent Pending" implies a patent has been applied for and should have a preliminary filing number. Otherwise, probably hot air.
Disclaimer, I am not an attorney and only give my "Opinion" based on work experience with the patents my company holds in my name. Number seven (?) pending. I do them for benny points when my annual review comes up.
Otherwise it is public art.
You are not subject to copyright laws if you redraw the images yourself.
If you intend to patent it and have not filed a preliminary filing and reveal it publicly, you can not get a patent in the USA. Don't even talk to anyone about it without a Non Disclosure Agreement.
"Patent Pending" implies a patent has been applied for and should have a preliminary filing number. Otherwise, probably hot air.
Disclaimer, I am not an attorney and only give my "Opinion" based on work experience with the patents my company holds in my name. Number seven (?) pending. I do them for benny points when my annual review comes up.
You can't transfer the meaning of copy. A copy of a CD, for instance, is not the same as a reverse engineered copy of a non-patented circuit. As much as it might offend one's sense of fair play, if you don't patent a circuit anyone can reverse it and sell it with impunity (as long as they don't violate any trademarks you might have registered to identify it as yours). The disclaimers of "personal use only" on web posted schematics have no legal standing at all. In the US for sure and since the EU and the US have reciprocal treaties I doubt it is different elsewhere.
Its the same with electronic circuits.
There are only so many topologies for amplifiers so its hard to copyright a circuit.
I wondered because often we grab pieces of different copyrighted schematics and assemble them into a new design. An input stage from here, a VI limiter from there etc. And that's ok. But seemingly by the 'letter of the law', at least over here, it could be considered an infringement.
But there are also a lot of 'clone' boards on auction sites too. Many are old, out of production designs, others are newer.
But there are also a lot of 'clone' boards on auction sites too. Many are old, out of production designs, others are newer.
A constant current source has a very limited number of topologies so is hard to copyright. Same for a current mirror. Same for Vbe and Vgs multipliers.
Quite often a lot of these circuit designers are long gone and so the copyright is freed up.
Not if Australia and the US have a reciprocal treaty. Copyright never protects the ideas embodied in the drawings. Infringement only applies to patents not copyrights. If you post a schematic and don't patent it the ideas/circuits in it they are in the public domain.
From my understanding this is not a problem for you. If the someone else tried to sell the clone, it would depend on whether or not they violated the specific intellectual product covered by patent. (most patents are actually improvements on previous patents "Prior Art").
Try looking up 6,667,705
I don't see how I got this but I did.
I'm sure there are a bunch of people violating the patent, as it is pretty basic. My parent company is not interested in anyone unless they get sued by them (they use their portfolio as a club) or someone blatantly copies the product using the patent (third party selling an identical product).
I think my confusion was between IP infringement versus copyright infringement which is two different beasts.
Using a portion of a patented design but then selling it would be wrong as opposed to fair use of a design.
Copyright infringement occurs when you make a copy of a piece of copyrighted material without permission from the copyright owner. For example, when you copy a music CD. Borrowing a CD at the library and making a copy for your own personal use is copyright infringement.
Using someone else's patented idea without proper licensing is patent infringement.
Reverse engineering something from pictures found in the public domain might be OK. Though, if you inadvertently infringe on their patent (assuming it's even granted), you could technically be in trouble for patent infringement.
Reverse engineering, say, a copy of Microsoft Windows, would probably be OK in terms of IP law, but it would be a violation of the licensing terms between you and Microsoft. You know... All that legalese crap in ALLCAPS that you instinctively clicked "I Agree" to when you installed Windoze. That becomes a civil matter between you and Microsoft.
In reality, few companies will go after you for IP infringement unless you start affecting their bottom line. As others have eluded to already, patents are basically for marketing and for use in a peeing contest with other companies. It's sorta like a nuclear arms race, security dilemma, and mutually assured destruction. I can destroy you but you can also destroy me. In the end we just lock antlers and pay our lawyers.
Do note that once a patent expires, the IP becomes public domain and can be reproduced by anybody (skilled in the art).
Tom
Last edited:
If you copy any patented idea for your own personal use, its technically illegal, but nobody cares. Start selling them, and attract some attention, expect to get at least a "cease and desist" letter....maybe with threats of legal action. Maybe lots worse if you start stealing their profits. Either way, a patent or copyright just gives the owner the right to sue in court. They still need a reason to pay the legal costs.....if you have nothing worth taking, theyr'e not coming for it.
How many of us copied the Apple II computer in the late 70's. Apple fought back with the Integrated Wozniak Machine chip that kept us from copying the floppy disk controller.......A friend at a local computer company created a unique controller that worked with a standard Shugart drive and a small microcontroller chip......it wouldn't read some copy protected discs that used half tracks to hide the code.
Copyright and trademark law gets into a very gray area very quickly. I make a PCB for a DIY amplifier design. I called it the "simple" followed by the common abbreviation for single ended, a fairly generic name. It seems that a company markets a home theater product with a similar name that is neither simple, or single ended. A registered letter came threatening me with the power of a large legal entity with "53 lawyers on staff." My lawyer advised me to change the name. My PCB is now the "SSE." It's not always about "who is right," it's about "who has the biggest legal firepower" in a court of law.
Try looking up 6,667,705.....I don't see how I got this but I did.
I have several patents. Due to the breakup of Motorola they are now owned, or co-owned by several companies, including Google, and Lenovo, a Chinese computer company who now owns the Motorola name in the cellular marketplace. The first patent I ever got is almost identical to one held by Sony, and another held by Ericsson. The difference, mine pertains to "trunked radio systems" Ericsson's says "cellular phone" and Sony's says "portable FM radio product" (Walkman). All are totally obsolete now.
That is known as a "design patent." It covers the shape and / or look and feel of a product. Different rules apply for them. Car companies are always pushing the edges here. I remember Chrysler (Jeep) suing GM (Hummer) over the look of the grill. Chrysler lost. Ditto several flip phones, including two of ours, RAZR and the i1000.
How many of us copied the Apple II computer in the late 70's. Apple fought back with the Integrated Wozniak Machine chip that kept us from copying the floppy disk controller.......A friend at a local computer company created a unique controller that worked with a standard Shugart drive and a small microcontroller chip......it wouldn't read some copy protected discs that used half tracks to hide the code.
Copyright and trademark law gets into a very gray area very quickly. I make a PCB for a DIY amplifier design. I called it the "simple" followed by the common abbreviation for single ended, a fairly generic name. It seems that a company markets a home theater product with a similar name that is neither simple, or single ended. A registered letter came threatening me with the power of a large legal entity with "53 lawyers on staff." My lawyer advised me to change the name. My PCB is now the "SSE." It's not always about "who is right," it's about "who has the biggest legal firepower" in a court of law.
Try looking up 6,667,705.....I don't see how I got this but I did.
I have several patents. Due to the breakup of Motorola they are now owned, or co-owned by several companies, including Google, and Lenovo, a Chinese computer company who now owns the Motorola name in the cellular marketplace. The first patent I ever got is almost identical to one held by Sony, and another held by Ericsson. The difference, mine pertains to "trunked radio systems" Ericsson's says "cellular phone" and Sony's says "portable FM radio product" (Walkman). All are totally obsolete now.
That is known as a "design patent." It covers the shape and / or look and feel of a product. Different rules apply for them. Car companies are always pushing the edges here. I remember Chrysler (Jeep) suing GM (Hummer) over the look of the grill. Chrysler lost. Ditto several flip phones, including two of ours, RAZR and the i1000.
Last edited:
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.