Author Topic: Keysight Scary Letter  (Read 86608 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline mark03

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 708
  • Country: us
Re: Keysight Scary Letter
« Reply #250 on: February 05, 2019, 08:40:30 pm »
Sadly, I really have to question the intellect of some of these posters. It seems they live for unnecessary drama. It isn't as if Keysight is telling them "you have to give us the equipment back and we're not giving you anything in return, tough luck".
That comes from the expectation to be screwed by corporations. Unfortunately it is the reality here.
When relying on corporate customer service, then yes, I agree.  But this could be an opportunity to harness the power of corporate risk aversion, an almost limitless resource, potentially operating in your favor :-DD
All I can think, reading this thread, is wow, I wish that were me!  Time will tell, which view is correct.
 

Offline gnavigator1007

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 374
  • Country: us
Re: Keysight Scary Letter
« Reply #251 on: February 05, 2019, 08:41:18 pm »
Did the letter(s) received reference specific serial number or did they only refer to the units by model number? Just curious.

I'm definitely not understanding the level of freakout going on here now. Daniel has said they're not going to do anything crazy. His reputation has been pretty solid. The OP has even edited their first post after being in touch with Keysight. Some of the language in the original letter was poorly chosen and I think contributed to some of the conspiracy theorizing here. Overall, I'd say it was pretty non threatening.
 

Offline Mr. Scram

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 9810
  • Country: 00
  • Display aficionado
Re: Keysight Scary Letter
« Reply #252 on: February 05, 2019, 08:45:10 pm »
That's presumably what they're trying to do. But some people think that digging your heels in even before hearing an offer is a good idea.
No, that's not what they're trying to do. They're coming up with a very incomplete and not quite sensible story and a vaguely threatening attitude, while not even acknowledging the message of people who are willing to hear them out. If someone walks up to your door and tells you you'll need to cooperate with them but can't explain why and is somewhat threatening about it, you obviously tell them to take a hike. People aren't trying to be smart, dicks or are digging in their heels. They're just expecting to be treated with some decency.

I'd love to have a "most wanted" 34401A on the bench. ;D
 

Offline gnavigator1007

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 374
  • Country: us
Re: Keysight Scary Letter
« Reply #253 on: February 05, 2019, 09:07:05 pm »
They're coming up with a very incomplete and not quite sensible story and a vaguely threatening attitude,

I agree that Keysight is not divulging much, but i just don't see the threatening attitude in the letter. Not saying I wouldn't have been a bit worried if I'd received one of those letters, but they specifically say they prefer a cooperative approach (though the way it is worded does seem to leave the door open to legal measures if they don't get the cooperation they'd otherwise prefer) and also acknowledge the recipients' costs, indicating Keysight's willingness to compensate. Doesn't seem like they even know what they are going to do with any of the equipment yet. Looks like they are trying to figure out what exactly is out there and where it's gone. This is why I was asking earlier if they mention specific serial numbers or are only referencing model numbers that were known to have been sold by Outback.
 

Offline nctnico

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 26751
  • Country: nl
    • NCT Developments
Re: Keysight Scary Letter
« Reply #254 on: February 05, 2019, 09:15:53 pm »
Sorry, but that is not how copyright works. The copyright owner always has full control over the work. Even if you didn't sign some kind of agreement it is implied. Please read more about how copyright works and how much power a copyright owner -legally- has.
That really isn't how copyright works. You don't retain control over a work after it's sold, unless this is agreed upon by both parties. That'd be unworkable and ridiculous, which is itself means it's void in many places.
Just not true. Again: read more about it. When becoming self employed I dug deep into how copyright works. One of the things I learned is that even when a customer pays me to write software I still own the copyright by default. This seems very counter intuitive to most people. However getting the copyright (legal) part right in my term & conditions has helped me enourmously getting paid when one of my customers went belly-up. Copyright has to be transferred explicity from the creator to another party. OTOH licenses can be implied and don't need a seperate contract. After all you don't need to sign a license agreement when you buy a music or movies. This doesn't mean you can do with the work as you like (for example upload it on internet).

Please read more about how copyright works and how much power a copyright owner -legally- has.
Far less than you think. What is says in books and reality are two different things.  'We' have taken cases and won, it costs about +50k a go.  Winning and getting any money are two different things.
True but this thread isn't about getting money. It is about getting equipment back. The fact a law firm is already involved shows some people are willing to throw some serious cash at this problem.

Anyway, I find the IP (copyright) claim an interesting angle from a legal point of view because there isn't much else they can work with to reclaim ownership of the equipment.
There are small lies, big lies and then there is what is on the screen of your oscilloscope.
 

Offline Mr. Scram

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 9810
  • Country: 00
  • Display aficionado
Re: Keysight Scary Letter
« Reply #255 on: February 05, 2019, 09:25:53 pm »
Just not true. Again: read more about it. When becoming self employed I dug deep into how copyright works. One of the things I learned is that even when a customer pays me to write software I still own the copyright by default. This seems very counter intuitive to most people. However getting the copyright (legal) part right in my term & conditions has helped me enourmously getting paid when one of my customers went belly-up. Copyright has to be transferred explicity from the creator to another party. OTOH licenses can be implied and don't need a seperate contract. After all you don't need to sign a license agreement when you buy a music or movies. This doesn't mean you can do with the work as you like (for example upload it on internet).

True but this thread isn't about getting money. It is about getting equipment back. The fact a law firm is already involved shows some people are willing to throw some serious cash at this problem.
You're correct that Keysight retains the copyright over their software, but that doesn't mean they retain full control or ownership over every copy they sold. The latter is a misinterpretation of the law. The creator retaining copyright means the new owner cannot duplicate or distribute the software he finds in the device without the device itself. It doesn't mean Keysight gets to control the ownership of the device, unless both parties agree to this.

Your music comparison is apt. You can buy a CD without signing a license, because the musician or record company doesn't have a say in what you do with the physical CD. You cannot make copies and distribute them, as that's prohibited by copyright law. You can play, destroy, sell or give away the CD as you wish. Unless you sign an agreement not to do these things, of course.
 

Offline sokoloff

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1799
  • Country: us
Re: Keysight Scary Letter
« Reply #256 on: February 05, 2019, 10:58:06 pm »
 
The following users thanked this post: Mr. Scram

Offline nctnico

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 26751
  • Country: nl
    • NCT Developments
Re: Keysight Scary Letter
« Reply #257 on: February 05, 2019, 11:34:35 pm »
Agree with Scram. Google "first sale doctrine"

https://www.justice.gov/jm/criminal-resource-manual-1854-copyright-infringement-first-sale-doctrine

Don't argue with me, just think about why the law firm Keysight hired is specialised in IP and copyright. They are very aware of how copyright laws work and wouldn't go this route if it was useless.
There are small lies, big lies and then there is what is on the screen of your oscilloscope.
 

Offline Mr. Scram

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 9810
  • Country: 00
  • Display aficionado
Re: Keysight Scary Letter
« Reply #258 on: February 05, 2019, 11:38:43 pm »
Don't argue with me, just think about why the law firm Keysight hired is specialised in IP and copyright. They are very aware of how copyright laws work and wouldn't go this route if it was useless.
It's not as if companies ever use scare tactics when they know they don't have any legal standing, right?
 

Offline nctnico

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 26751
  • Country: nl
    • NCT Developments
Re: Keysight Scary Letter
« Reply #259 on: February 05, 2019, 11:53:35 pm »
Don't argue with me, just think about why the law firm Keysight hired is specialised in IP and copyright. They are very aware of how copyright laws work and wouldn't go this route if it was useless.
It's not as if companies ever use scare tactics when they know they don't have any legal standing, right?
That is just pure speculation on your part. Their exact claim is unknown at this point so it is better to assume they have a valid one.
« Last Edit: February 05, 2019, 11:56:29 pm by nctnico »
There are small lies, big lies and then there is what is on the screen of your oscilloscope.
 

Offline Mr. Scram

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 9810
  • Country: 00
  • Display aficionado
Re: Keysight Scary Letter
« Reply #260 on: February 06, 2019, 12:08:21 am »
That is just pure speculation on your part. Their exact claim is unknown at this point so it is better to assume they have a valid one.
Everything about that argument is backwards. "These people are causing me trouble for reasons they refuse to properly define, nor reply to my communications. I'd better give them exactly what they want!" Assume they're talking out of their ass until they've proven otherwise. The worst case scenario is that you make the device go "poof".
 

Offline nctnico

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 26751
  • Country: nl
    • NCT Developments
Re: Keysight Scary Letter
« Reply #261 on: February 06, 2019, 12:24:51 am »
That is just pure speculation on your part. Their exact claim is unknown at this point so it is better to assume they have a valid one.
Everything about that argument is backwards. "These people are causing me trouble for reasons they refuse to properly define, nor reply to my communications. I'd better give them exactly what they want!" Assume they're talking out of their ass until they've proven otherwise.
Which could burn the bridge to the road which leads to a good deal. The sensible thing to do is to take any claim seriously and investigate its validity. Digging your heels into the sand and/or ignoring a claim isn't going to make things better. In most cases a timely reply to a claim makes all the difference.
« Last Edit: February 06, 2019, 12:27:50 am by nctnico »
There are small lies, big lies and then there is what is on the screen of your oscilloscope.
 
The following users thanked this post: KaneTW

Offline Mr. Scram

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 9810
  • Country: 00
  • Display aficionado
Re: Keysight Scary Letter
« Reply #262 on: February 06, 2019, 12:35:59 am »
Which could burn the bridge to the road which leads to a good deal. The sensible thing to do is to take any claim seriously and investigate its validity. Digging your heels into the sand and/or ignoring a claim isn't going to make things better.
That's the point. People are doing neither. People are trying to assess validity, but nothing to go on is provided and attempts to establish the somewhat forcefully requested contact remain unanswered. If you're after further cooperation, that's not a very good way of securing it.

Besides, if Keysight is determined to resolve whatever issue they see, not jumping to conclusions based on vague statements isn't going to burn bridges.
 

Offline gnavigator1007

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 374
  • Country: us
 

Offline Yansi

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3893
  • Country: 00
  • STM32, STM8, AVR, 8051
Re: Keysight Scary Letter
« Reply #264 on: February 06, 2019, 01:17:35 am »
Very interesting thread.  Read through all of 11 pages. Interested what will come up next.  :popcorn:
 

Offline Brumby

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 12288
  • Country: au
Re: Keysight Scary Letter
« Reply #265 on: February 06, 2019, 01:32:11 am »
Some points:
(A)  I would like to suggest we don't get too wrapped up in the reason (or pretext, depending on your standing) for the approach that has been used.  It may be a legitimate claim, but it is certainly a mechanism for opening a conversation.  Yes, it may be curious, questionable, obscure or even laughable (as some have indicated), but there has to be some sort of contact to get the ball rolling.  I would not be at all surprised if the fundamental secrecy framework that governed the equipment involved extends to these communications and that, as a result, these communications are constrained to such a degree that they end up feeling contrived, or even "lame".

(B)  Having a legal practice involved from the get-go is nothing to get up in arms about, IMO.  That would be the preferred choice in my book to be involved in this sort of a campaign.  However, that does present the idea that further legal avenues may be exercised.  Some might call that intimidation, but I would consider that label a bit too harsh at this point.

(C)  Why have there been no reports of "offers" forthcoming?  To me, it's really very simple.  For any given item, the first thing that has to be done is to locate it.  Nobody is going to make any offers until they have confirmation they have found the current owner.  Until then, don't expect any more than the hint already given: "made whole".  If someone who is approached does not confirm they have the item, then I can't see any offers forthcoming.  Doesn't make sense to offer something to someone who may not have the item.

If someone has confirmed ownership and received an offer, it is entirely likely that the details will be subject to a confidentiality agreement.  In fact, I couldn't see it happening any other way.  While any other legal angles may be tenuous, breaking such an explicit agreement would be a pretty straightforward lawsuit.

(D)  Considering there would seem to be an obvious element of secrecy, there is another factor involved - and this is one the conspiracy theorists would love to grab hold of - minimising the visibility of the stuff-up to the public.  There are a dozen reasons/excuses you could roll out here.  Whether they are legitimate or not is irrelevant.  The fact is, the desire for secrecy is real - and while we will have anarchists out there that want to call it out, the powers that be will be aiming for the lowest profile possible.  Whether you like this sort of thing or not, it's a fact of life.  You can either fight it, or roll with it - and the ones likely to fight it will be the ones who aren't involved and have nothing to gain, other than having been seen on their soapbox.

(E)  From the evidence available, the approach taken indicates a desire for an amicable resolution.  This is simple courtesy - as nobody involved in this campaign has done anything wrong.  It would seem logical to explore the alternatives in the same vein.

(F)  Also, remember, someone will be paying the bill for all this - and it will be their desire for the total to be as low as possible, so IF the approach is to offer a new product (with a $1,000 hit on the bill) in exchange to resolve a given situation, it's going to be cheaper than getting lawyers involved.

(G)  Keysight's involvement here seems pretty obvious to me.  It would seem all the equipment involved is Keysight gear.  A logical situation - a bulk purchase from one vendor to kit out some project.  This gear got out in the wild and now they need to get it back - but what would be the best way?  The people that acquired the gear would have done so because of the functionality each item can provide - so they aren't going to be happy if that is lost from their workshop.  An exchange would seem to have a far better chance of a happy result ... and if you're going to exchange your Keysight (or Agilent or HP) gear for something else, then offering Keysight kit is going to go down a lot better.  Where better to source Keysight gear, than direct from Keysight.  Also, Keysight are going to want to cooperate, since they have a vested interest in being seen as a cooperative partner.  Helping out in a situation like this is going to support their corporate presence and maintain a positive image in the eyes of those approving the spend on future equipment purchases.  In fact, Keysight would be hard pressed to say no.  At the end, I have little doubt that Keysight will submit a bill to the campaign manager for their contribution.

(H)  IANAL - but, if all else fails, I would be wondering on the legal avenues available - and that's where the original secrecy elements that gave rise to this whole situation would seem to present an angle.  Can anyone comment on this hypothesis:  If the project for which all this equipment was purchased was covered under some national security classification, could the argument be made that since its eventual destruction was mandated under such an umbrella, that is continued existence represents a risk to national security**, resulting in a seizure order of some sort?  Could this also be sufficient for a search warrant?

Edit:
** In principle.  The fact that an item like a DMM you could buy as an individual is no practical risk being irrelevant.
« Last Edit: February 06, 2019, 01:37:47 am by Brumby »
 
The following users thanked this post: Mickster, newbrain, Keysight DanielBogdanoff, soldar

Offline bicycleguy

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 265
  • Country: us
Re: Keysight Scary Letter
« Reply #266 on: February 06, 2019, 04:44:07 am »
If you have some of it and received a letter/correspondence, please respond. We're not going to do anything crazy or insane.

Thanks for your patience!

I have, and yet I received no response at all from Mr. Harrington.
Looking through my sent emails, there were two; On 12/20/18 and 12/26/2018. I only got read receipts from his email client (which I saved just in case.)

I'm going to send a third email to him this morning.

Perhaps a quicker response would come from a letter like this:
Dear sir,
Owning this instrument under the present circumstances is causing me undo stress.  Baring further communication, I will be putting the instrument up for sale on fleabay to the highest bidder ASAP.
thank you
 

Offline Brumby

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 12288
  • Country: au
Re: Keysight Scary Letter
« Reply #267 on: February 06, 2019, 04:56:19 am »
I have to agree that the lack of acknowledgement of those communications that have been sent is not very professional.
 

Offline mikeselectricstuff

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 13694
  • Country: gb
    • Mike's Electric Stuff
Re: Keysight Scary Letter
« Reply #268 on: February 06, 2019, 07:57:05 am »
If it was some sort of national security thing they wouldn't have sent out a letter to give people any notice.
If they had any legal claim they would have had to say that at the outset. There is no indication in the initial letter that there would be any consequences of selling on the equipment. All they have done is made a request.
Again, if they were prepared to take legal action they would need to have said so at the outset.
IANAL but the lack of any legal claim in the initial letter, or suggestion that it was stolen would  seem to negate any possibility of action if the equipment was sold on.


Youtube channel:Taking wierd stuff apart. Very apart.
Mike's Electric Stuff: High voltage, vintage electronics etc.
Day Job: Mostly LEDs
 

Online RoGeorge

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6145
  • Country: ro
Re: Keysight Scary Letter
« Reply #269 on: February 06, 2019, 08:20:21 am »
Most probably the lot should have been destroyed, but instead it was sold at an action, by mistake.

The bureaucracy still need the "destroyed" confirmation papers, so that's why the letters.  The instruments are needed in order to be destroyed, in order to stamp some papers, in order to store the stamped papers in a nice file, in order to be there just in case someone will ever bother to check those papers.  There is no secret "Recipe of Immortality" in those instruments' firmware, or something.

IMO, blanket national security laws (combined with bureaucracy) is the only explanation that makes sense.
 
The following users thanked this post: cpt.armadillo

Offline Fungus

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 16560
  • Country: 00
Re: Keysight Scary Letter
« Reply #270 on: February 06, 2019, 08:26:50 am »
Here in Switzerland, I would tell them to fuck off. USA has nothing to say over here.

Really? Would you tell them to fuck off if they offered you a replacement item+your money back?

That tells me something about the Swiss.
 

Offline Fungus

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 16560
  • Country: 00
Re: Keysight Scary Letter
« Reply #271 on: February 06, 2019, 08:39:46 am »
(C)  Why have there been no reports of "offers" forthcoming?  To me, it's really very simple.  For any given item, the first thing that has to be done is to locate it.  Nobody is going to make any offers until they have confirmation they have found the current owner.  Until then, don't expect any more than the hint already given: "made whole".  If someone who is approached does not confirm they have the item, then I can't see any offers forthcoming.  Doesn't make sense to offer something to someone who may not have the item.

a) It's probably not been formally decided yet.
b) They probably don't want people posting about offers here.

I doubt you're going to get rich by 'holding out' though. Keysight will already have assumed they're not going to get all of them back so what's one more device? Offers will be reasonable (eg. money back+an equivalent device) so that Keysight can prove to the MIB that they made an effort. That's it.

ie. You're much more likely to end up on the no-fly list than make money.
 
The following users thanked this post: cpt.armadillo

Offline Brumby

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 12288
  • Country: au
Re: Keysight Scary Letter
« Reply #272 on: February 06, 2019, 09:21:46 am »
(C)  Why have there been no reports of "offers" forthcoming?  To me, it's really very simple.  For any given item, the first thing that has to be done is to locate it.  Nobody is going to make any offers until they have confirmation they have found the current owner.  Until then, don't expect any more than the hint already given: "made whole".  If someone who is approached does not confirm they have the item, then I can't see any offers forthcoming.  Doesn't make sense to offer something to someone who may not have the item.

a) It's probably not been formally decided yet.
b) They probably don't want people posting about offers here.
Those points - and one or two others - were on my mind as well, but I'd waffled on enough as it was.


Quote
I doubt you're going to get rich by 'holding out' though.
Agreed.
 

Offline Jwalling

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 1517
  • Country: us
  • This is work?
Re: Keysight Scary Letter
« Reply #273 on: February 06, 2019, 11:05:50 am »
Did the letter(s) received reference specific serial number or did they only refer to the units by model number? Just curious.

As you can see from the letter I posted here: https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/keysight-ip-intimidation/msg2153944/#msg2153944
There were no serial numbers given to me.

The complete text from my email:
Quote
Hello Mr. Harrington,

I did not hear back from you from an email I sent on 12/20/2018, so I'm assuming I am dealing with you on this matter.

If you could supply me with the serial numbers of the equipment in question, I could see if I am still in possession of either of them.
I am assuming that the issue involves software on the hard disk drives; the rest of the equipment is just a number of circuit boards / hardware.

It is important to note that these two instruments in question both run Microsoft Windows XP. Because of that, I always assume that there is the potential of a virus or malware on the disk drives from the previous owner(s).
Knowing this, I always remove the hard drives on these and replace them with brand new solid-state disk drives (SSDs).
I then re-image the new replacement SSD drive from an as-shipped-from Agilent Symantec Ghost recovery image that is located in a hidden FAT-32 partition.
In essence, the makes the software on the instrument back to how it originally shipped from Agilent.

I still have 5 of the disk drives in my possession (Please see the attached picture) Typically, I use these in other applications and equipment after re-imaging them.
I don't know whether any of these came from the instruments in question, nor do I have any way of telling.

Please advise what you would like to do.
Thank you.


A week or two after I sent that email, curiosity got the better of me, and I did take a look at the drives that I still had and found the one belonging to the MSO scope. The pagefile.sys had a date stamp that matched the date of shipment.

Jay

System error. Strike any user to continue.
 
The following users thanked this post: gnavigator1007

Offline Yansi

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3893
  • Country: 00
  • STM32, STM8, AVR, 8051
Re: Keysight Scary Letter
« Reply #274 on: February 06, 2019, 11:12:13 am »
Here in Switzerland, I would tell them to fuck off. USA has nothing to say over here.

Really? Would you tell them to fuck off if they offered you a replacement item+your money back?

That tells me something about the Swiss.

I am no Swiss, but not far from there. As also a proud owner of some rather cheaply acquired old  rusty HP/Agilent instruments imported from the US of A,  I would have though of the same, but probably told them a bit more calmly.  Any replacement sent in would cost me half my year's earnings on taxes, when would such (new expensive) instrument got imported.

Hence also why I can't and don't participate in any of those "free giving" competitions. I could not just pay the taxes. The state would rob me of of my money.  But that's just how it works here.
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf