Big company Intellectual Property concerns on the forum

[EEVblog]

So I get this email from the legal counsel at a big company who shall remain nameless, pointing out a competing Chinese product that is violating their IP. Ok.
Their concern is this product has been mentioned and discussed on this forum several times, by users, and as such, they "would appreciate your cooperation to strictly moderate postings on the forum regarding this product".
i.e. they are asking me to remove and moderate all past and future discussion of this product on the forum.
I declined to do so on the grounds that:
a) There is none of the companies IP being violated on the forum (which I am strict on and will remove)
b) This is what the forum is for, open discussion of industry products.
c) Moderation of such things is against the "open" nature of this community forum, and will hurt the reputation of the forum.

It seems as though they can't shut down this Chinese product directly, so they have to go after stifling all mention of it by indirect means.
IMO they can fight their own battles, this is not the place to do it.

Discuss...

[Kjelt]

You could accomodate them maybe by editing the first post about this product and mentioning that this product violates the IP of this company.
But removing and moderating free discussions on a free open forum sounds very much like censorship 

[ElektroQuark]

Let the big company remain nameless.
What's the Chinese product?

[EEVblog]

You could accomodate them maybe by editing the first post about this product and mentioning that this product violates the IP of this company.

That's a possibility. But one poster already pointed that it does anyway.
And mention of it is not all contained in one thread.

[HackedFridgeMagnet]

I don't suppose you could post the whole letter from the big company? In the interests of transparency.

[Kjelt]

That's a possibility. But one poster already pointed that it does anyway.
And mention of it is not all contained in one thread.

Well follow your gut feeling, as long as you don't go to battle with these companies, because they have huge warchests which might worst case result in the end of the forum which is something you and we all don't want.

[EEVblog]

I don't suppose you could post the whole letter from the big company? In the interests of transparency.

I don't think I'd like to do that without their permission, and I don't really see a need to do at this stage. They didn't piss me off that much :->

[jpb]

You could accomodate them maybe by editing the first post about this product and mentioning that this product violates the IP of this company.
But removing and moderating free discussions on a free open forum sounds very much like censorship 

It might be better to state that you have received a statement from company X that this product violates their IP, rather than categorically stating that it violates company X's IP. It might even be better to allow company X to make a statement as a posting and the Chinese company to respond if they like.

It is best to avoid taking sides in any way both from the point of view of neutrality and also because you don't want to get involved in any legal dispute with either party.

An interesting recent case is that of Dyson and Samsung :

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-26242865

[EEVblog]

It might even be better to allow company X to make a statement as a posting and the Chinese company to respond if they like.

I have invited them to do so.

[amyk]

Good for you!

Nice to see someone who stands up to this kind of crap. Go for it!

+1 Just say no to censorship.

[codeboy2k]

Lots of companies make big claims that another company is violating their IP. I'd be curious to know if these are just claims or have they stood up to the test in court?

Even if they have WON in court, there is absolutely no precedent for you or anyone else for that matter to stop talking about the infringing product.

[digsys]

Most IP / patents are BS anyway. No rules in OZ that say you can't talk or discuss technology EVEN if it is IP / patented.
I'd ignore them and wait for the next email .. IF there is any.

[dexters_lab]

It's it's the product that is infringing not the forum, their lawyers should be spending time trying to block the sales, import and ultimately bring a case in china against the company that made the product.

Not hassling some forum where its been discussed.

[c4757p]

The fact that they think they can just make all mentions of a competing product vanish is, frankly, adorable.

Whoever this company is, they have some funny ideas about the way the world works.

[andtfoot]

The fact that they think they can just make all mentions of a competing product vanish is, frankly, adorable.

Whoever this company is, they have some funny ideas about the way the world works.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect

   

[dr.diesel]

Corporate bullies, please expose them so I can make better buying decisions in the future.

[EEVblog]

I'd ignore them and wait for the next email .. IF there is any.

I responded and told them no, it's not going to happen.

[DL8RI]

Corporate bullies, please expose them so I can make better buying decisions in the future.

As far as I understand it, they did not threaten Dave/the Forum but asked him. So that's Okay for me.
There are some real bold ripoffs around like the several Hakko-Clones or this indian "GMC"-meters.
And there are some people selling this stuff aggressively trying to promote their crap here.

I can imagine, the "original designers" not really being happy about that.

Therefore I can understand this mail. And -as I said- I think it's Okay as long as they don't threaten Dave.
I was Moderator/Administrator in a bigger Forum (>700000 Users) for nearly 10 Years. We had more than one time some "unhappy Company-Lawyer". Some were nice, some were assholes.

And I don't think they have to be really worried. As for example a thread I was following was the one about this Indian Gossen-Clones. They were pretty quick unmasked as ripoffs and the seller who wanted to marked this things had a quite hard time.

[jucole]

Firstly I personally think its pretty rude of the company to send a formal email instead of an informal call /email to you!  secondly this is a forum to discuss all things electronics, so long as the posts aren't outside the "unwritten rules";    I mean it's like a child walking up to group of strangers and saying don't play with that boy xy  because he bent my finger back and then pulled my nose!

Some free advice to said company; don't burn your bridges - reach out to the community to help you;  tell us your story.   surely it makes more sense to go after people selling your infringed products rather than people talking about them?   Why not offer an incentive to people to buy direct from you or your dealers.

But isn't this the very nature of the game?  you make a product,  you reap the cheap production costs overseas, you make some profit and you then you fully understand the risks involved about potential IP infringement.

[dr.diesel]

As far as I understand it, they did not threaten Dave/the Forum but asked him. So that's Okay for me.

For most people just receiving a letter from some huge company with a thousand lawyers frightens them.  Then asking for "strict" moderation of the forums, when Dave has no legal obligation to do so, they are most definitely attempting to push their weight around.

[brabus]

Honestly, I find the whole situation a bit weird.
A Chinese company is violating an IP? OK, but how could a forum censorship help solving the problem? 

I find the email very unprofessional, and tout court senseless. Why do they have to attack a public forum? We should then block any person who is just talking about that product, or even thinking about it? This is BS.

If a company is concerned about writing an email to Dave Jones to solve an IP violation issue, I am sorry to communicate them that their problem is not the Forum, but themselves.

Pathetic.

[TerraHertz]

Post a notice on your site that you charge $5000 per hour to consider the merit of legal representations sent to your site regarding IPR issues, and that sending you such communications signifies agreement to your terms.

Then next time you get such a letter, instead of replying "No", you can reply "No. Invoice for my time spent examining your claims and determining they are spurious: $5000."

[EEVblog]

For most people just receiving a letter from some huge company with a thousand lawyers frightens them.  Then asking for "strict" moderation of the forums, when Dave has no legal obligation to do so, they are most definitely attempting to push their weight around.

In this case I don't think it's a command from anyone high up to target the forum, I think it's just a case of an internal IP laywer being generally tasked with trying to stop IP infringement and they are doing searches and finding stuff like this forum, and they are trying to be "pro-active".
It is clear they know they don't have a leg to stand on, and it's certainly not threatening, and are asking for my co-operation in helping them. With the usual subtle lawyer-ish overtones of course. It is far from a cease-and-desist. It may in fact be a bit of a form-ish like response to many forums / websites.

[DL8RI]

For most people just receiving a letter from some huge company with a thousand lawyers frightens them.  Then asking for "strict" moderation of the forums, when Dave has no legal obligation to do so, they are most definitely attempting to push their weight around.

Depends on the letter/mail. Since Dave saw the opportunity to just say no, I don't see the point to make such a big fuss ("Pathetic", "attack" "Rude") about it. If they now try to threaten the Forum in any way, that's another story. And as I said, if the forum grows more, this will become "daily business" for Dave.

Maybe they take the invitation to, instead of removing the product, to talk about it. I would appreciate it. If they don't, they don't.

[GEuser]

Engineers will fix it all up! 

[EEVblog]

A Chinese company is violating an IP? OK, but how could a forum censorship help solving the problem? 

It doesn't. In fact it can only make it worse for them. Lawyers don't understand this though.

[dr.diesel]

Lawyers don't understand this though.

However they do understand the law, and knowing you have no legal obligation to remove said content the sent it anyhow, why?  Because they are in hopes of frightening you into removing the content.

The letter might not have been directly "worded" threatening, but it doesn't have to be to get their intent known.

Thankfully you know your rights, I hope this is the end of their pursuit.  If we're lucky they will join the forum with constructive posts and thoughts.   

[A Hellene]

Dave, do not let them intimidate you with their legal crap veiled threats because:

1. LEGAL is not LAWFUL, which means that not any legal claim is necessarily lawful also.

2. This is not a court order, whatever they sent you. It is an extrajudicial request, painted in the dark colours of the intimidation of a possible legal action against you if you will not comply with their (rightful or not) demands.

3. You cannot be held responsible for what some people might be discussing about, even if they discussed any possible dark secrets of some corporate entities.
Neither THEM losing revenue (because of some discussions your forum hosts, as they claim) is any better than YOU loosing revenue due to any possible departures of forum key contributors in the case you will choose to succumb to their intimidating tactics.

For example, you are not responsible for someone finding a copyright notice of company A within the firmware dicompilation lists of a company B product, which is suspiciously identical to a product sold under the brand name of company C. (By the way, is this the case?)

Moderator: Unwarranted reference to other off topic (religion) posts deleted.


-George

[mikeselectricstuff]

I'd ignore them and wait for the next email .. IF there is any.

I responded and told them no, it's not going to happen.

I'd probably have added that any further correspondence from them may be made public. 

[liquibyte]

Imagine this scenario.  The economy tanks and the governments can't bail shit out fast enough and the world decends into chaos.  Who would you imagine would be useful to help rebuild things?  Engineers, programmers, mechanics, scientists, lawers?

The lawers don't understand that their skillset is an imaginary construct with no real value to anyone in the grand scheme of things and that they are in fact holding back the entirety of humanity with their bullshit.  We'll never have the flying cars that the sci-fi greats promised should already be here because of the fear of getting your entire life destroyed for infringing some ill conceived and approved iPatent.

I for one am tired of lawers fucking things up.  Have a gander at the class of tools running my country.  I can only say that they had better hope this isn't the Roman empire all over again because of their shenanigans (cue historical and not religious reference) because I can't think of a more suited class of useless fools to not help teach to fish (purely religious reference).

[A Hellene]

If that is indeed what was censored then the mod doesn't seem to even understand it... Religious references? Where? Historical references, sure. More evidence that the mods are simultaneously out of control and ignorant. I'm just glad Dave got this email and not one of them, or who knows how much they would have nuked.

Yes, of course this is what was censored; with the exception of the last link about the Chalcidic alphabet and another depleted now link about the five-millennial old Trojan War, pointing at to a couple of historical references I have written at the locked 'Religion Thread' of May 2012.

I could attach my original message's backup but I am sure that it will also be obliterated; if you would like to read it, though, I could send it you you by a PM or by email.


Thank you,
-George

[tom66]

Not a lawyer... but doesn't everyone hate lawyers until they need one?
- You need a lawyer if you are prosecuted to get you the best possible outcome - this should and must remain your right.

- You need a lawyer if you are seeking damages for legitimate cases. The McDonalds coffee incident is often brought up as a frivolous case, but do you know what the original demands were? (Recommend you look them up - it doesn't sound so bad once you read into it...)

- Also, what happens if you invent a really neat thing - make a few thousand of them and can live nicely on that - then a big corp comes and steals your protected idea and your living. Should you lose?

Now, I'm not saying this system is perfect - it's far from it - but without lawyers I think it'd be worse.

It's sort of the natural outcome of competition. Competition produces the best system in theory - but in practice it's extremely wasteful; think about how many man-hours and dollars have gone into producing Samsung, Apple. HTC, Nokia, BlackBerry, Sony phones when they could all combine a seventh of that effort if only one company existed.

[nctnico]

I'd ignore them and wait for the next email .. IF there is any.

I responded and told them no, it's not going to happen.

That is the best course of action. Unless they come up with a court ruling saying you should remove any reference to that particular product...

It is a problem they should resolve with the Chinese company who is infringing their IP and/or companies importing/selling that equipment.

[Sigmoid]

You know, I kind of imagined Apple trying to remove all references to Samsung from the web (or vice versa). It's a ridiculous idea.
Funny request though. In a similar manner, I could, in theory, email Donald Trump and ask him to give me a million bucks in the hopes that he's in a charitable mood.

[TerraHertz]

Blaming lawyers for laws is like blaming car companies for gridlock, plumbers for leaks, or the mass media for dumbing down society.

Society, people and politicians are responsible for creating laws. Not lawyers. Laws are only created when there is a perceived need, or for the cynical, when a politician can see some political benefit. That benefit being bestowed upon them by voters ie. society.

Human nature is as it always was, and will be.

It's a specific instance of a more general rule: All self-perpetuating systems over time become more complex and parasitical of the wider environment in which they operate. The legal system and all its hangers-on expand in complexity indefinitely, the tax system does the same, parliaments, congresses, executive structures, customs&excise, law enforcement, industrial safety, health schemes, municipal boards, unions, ad infinitum. Cancer is a good analogy, and that extends to either doing something radical about it, or dying.

This tendency is identified in the book 'Collapse of Complex Societies' (Tainter) as ultimately a primary cause, common to most examples of social collapse throughout history. Societies intrinsically have a limit to their man-hour, material and energy resources. But elements of the social infrastructure tend to go parasitic, and demand more resources than are available. Because the people operating as units within those structures can't see the broader picture. They virtually never go "Oh hey, my entire career is a net drain on society, I should quit and learn some useful trade."

Likewise societies on the whole virtually never have facepalm moments, where they realise "Wait, this is stupid. We really should entirely abolish (patents/copyright/income-tax&theIRS/corporations/the entire body of existing law/Congress/the Presidency/etc) peacefully and just start over."

And because they don't do that, all societies ultimately fail(violently), collapse(violently), or have a revolution (violent or ideally not so violent.)

The 'collapse/fail' scenarios happen when the resources required to sustain the hugely bloated parasitical self-interest groups and systems, grow beyond the practically available resources. Inevitably. It's just basic thermodynamics - you can't have what doesn't exist.

Many argue that some nations today are well into the energy & resources deficit zone already, and are just running on momentum, inertia and delusions. Not to mention theft from other nations. Where's all that gold gone anyway, FED?

In the meantime as the parasites grind onwards, you get many trivial examples. Like passive-aggressive letters from lawyers, 'asking' you to do something they have no standing or right to ask. Obviously in the hope that your fear of them will coerce you into compliance.

[don.r]

Personally, I would be more concerned about small company IP as small companies cannot afford the IP legal battles like big ones can. I would be more inclined to help the likes of Dave or other individual creators on here defend their IP rather than a large and deep-pocketed corp who can easily fight their own battles in court. JMVHO. Of course, Dave is under no obligation to defend either group.

[marshallh]

Something that can't go on, won't.

[DrGeoff]

You could accomodate them maybe by editing the first post about this product and mentioning that this product violates the IP of this company.
But removing and moderating free discussions on a free open forum sounds very much like censorship 

It's only an allegation, not a fact. Until the allegation is proven and upheld then that is all it will be.

[Psi]

I have an idea who this maybe, but we probably shouldn't start guessing.

[Legit-Design]

If it's some ripoff I think people take it as a warning and stay away anyways. If it's from china it has probably been bought from some place that is known for selling fakes and people expect that things that are too cheap are fakes. Therefore it drives people to buy from authorized sellers and having it discussed on the forums only does good to the actual company.

[TerraHertz]

Another factor that may be making it awkward for Dave, is that the company in question might be one that loans him stuff for reviews.

In which case the 'we're asking you to remove all mention of X from your site' letter takes on a more obnoxious aspect, in that it carries an implied 'or we will stop loaning you nice things.' I wonder if a lawyer could comment on whether that's 'demand with menaces'? Extortion?
I suppose it would depend on how well established the practice of loans for review had become.

That Dave is being polite about it, instead of doing stuff like naming the company, posting a scan of the letter, or telling them to go take a flying leap, suggests to me that may be the case. Or perhaps he's just a really polite guy.

[EEVblog]

That Dave is being polite about it, instead of doing stuff like naming the company, posting a scan of the letter, or telling them to go take a flying leap, suggests to me that may be the case. Or perhaps he's just a really polite guy.

As I said, it's a big company, and I suspect it's just some corporate lawyer is just acting on their own accord having been tasked with cleaning up the IP for this thing. I'd be very surprised if it's "the company" deliberately trying to shove their weight around.
They weren't rude, so I have no reason to be rude back. I just found their request silly and told them no.

[EEVblog]

They replied with "The intent of my initial message was to raise your awareness about this company."
Of course, only after their request was bluntly denied :->
So that's the end of it.
They are deciding if they will will post directly on the forum themselves about it in order to "raise awareness".

[BravoV]

Since Dave clearly stated he won't expose the parties involved, I guess its fair enough to start the guessing game ... 

My shot ... Siglent with that "Phosphorus" thingy (the hint) vs the big company (c'mon, you should know which by now ).

[AndyC_772]

Presumably they realise that "raising awareness" is the very last thing they should be doing, if discussion is taking place that they'd rather was NOT taking place.

My shot ... Siglent with that "Phosphorus" thingy (the hint) vs the big company (c'mon, you should know which by now ).

In which case, if it's who I think it is, they should be much more concerned about their own lack of technical progress over the last, say, 5 to 10 years. Shame, they used to make really decent, competitive kit. Emphasis on "used to".

[Frost]

My shot ... Siglent with that "Phosphorus" thingy

But sorry, this is only marketing geschwurbel (bullsh...).
They all use normal LC-Displays within their new products
and no phosphorus technology like FEDs for example.
So where is the big IP to put a LC-Display in a product.

[Sigmoid]

Many argue that some nations today are well into the energy & resources deficit zone already, and are just running on momentum, inertia and delusions. Not to mention theft from other nations. Where's all that gold gone anyway, FED?

Not that it would help anyone anyway. You can't eat gold, or do anything productive with it (well except for making microchips and gold plated connectors, but that needs very little of it).

[Sigmoid]

But sorry, this is only marketing geschwurbel (bullsh...).
They all use normal LC-Displays within their new products
and no phosphorus technology like FEDs for example.
So where is the big IP to put a LC-Display in a product.

We're talking about "digital phosphor" (DPO), wildly flaunted as the greatest thing since sliced bread by its creator. It's two things - less downtime between signal acquisition periods, and a digital emulation of the intensity gradation on a CRT display, allowing to see infrequent wave patterns.
A well known competitor has made a point of frequently denouncing it as useless and marketing crap tho.

[Rigby]

I declined to do so on the grounds that:
a) There is none of the companies IP being violated on the forum (which I am strict on and will remove)
b) This is what the forum is for, open discussion of industry products.
c) Moderation of such things is against the "open" nature of this community forum, and will hurt the reputation of the forum.

I agree with this, completely.  Not violated here means not your problem.

[G7PSK]

 There is no law ageist talking about any IP. in fact if they have got a patent that knowledge is in the public domain you can't use it directly but you can talk about it and even develop upon it to something else.

 Gagging is a two edged sword, In order to stop all mention of the opponents product you would have to stop all mention of the original so as comparisons would not be made.

[free_electron]

We're talking about "digital phosphor" (DPO), wildly flaunted as the greatest thing since sliced bread by its creator.

well known fact that sliced bread goes stale, moldy and crufty much quicker than regular bread .

DPO is junk. Take one of the Tek 7xx series and flick DPO on. the scope becomes slow as molasses.... it's dead time goes through the roof

[FJV]

I wouldn't blindly follow the advice given on this forum without knowing exactly it's worth.

I would look for advice of a professional lawyer in the relevant field.

People I know that have studied law that used to give advice for free have had that advice routinely ignored, because some guy in the pub or on the internet that sounded pretty knowledgeable gave different advice.

Needless to say that caused a lot of problems for the guy following the wrong advice.

I wouldn't like to make the same mistake.

[tom66]

I just googled for DPO and got a massive dose of deja-vu radiation: I noticed the TDS3000C series scope is still sold, is this the same as the TDS3034 that my workplace has? If so, that's crazy. That thing was so slow... and the memory length terrible... I cannot believe they still sell a scope with only 10kpoints data?

[Galenbo]

It doesn't. In fact it can only make it worse for them. Lawyers don't understand this though.

Or maybe they do. Making it worse is even more work and dollars for the Lawyers.

[EEVblog]

I just googled for DPO and got a massive dose of deja-vu radiation: I noticed the TDS3000C series scope is still sold, is this the same as the TDS3034 that my workplace has? If so, that's crazy. That thing was so slow... and the memory length terrible... I cannot believe they still sell a scope with only 10kpoints data?

Yep, that's Tektronix for you.

[EEVblog]

I wouldn't blindly follow the advice given on this forum without knowing exactly it's worth.

I'm not following anyone's advice, I followed my own.

I would look for advice of a professional lawyer in the relevant field.

Why?
To anyone with half a clue about anything it was entirely clear that they didn't have a leg to stand on.
Jumping right into getting paid advice from a lawyer when you haven't been threatened with anything is just silly, and one the problems with modern society.
I knew it was BS and simply stood up to them and politely said no, and they backed down without a fight. Then they admitted it wasn't even a fight to begin with.

[Kjelt]

Good to hear it ended well. 

[AndyC_772]

I just googled for DPO and got a massive dose of deja-vu radiation: I noticed the TDS3000C series scope is still sold, is this the same as the TDS3034 that my workplace has? If so, that's crazy. That thing was so slow... and the memory length terrible... I cannot believe they still sell a scope with only 10kpoints data?

It's basically the same, but a bit faster and with a USB port in place of the floppy drive.

It's laughably overpriced for its spec, but I used a 3034B daily for many years and it was always a reliable, trustworthy and highly usable piece of kit. I'm not at all surprised that there's still demand for it, especially in cases where the cost of learning, supporting and testing a new scope is significant. Like, say, the Agilent 34401 DMM... if it isn't broke, don't fix it.

[Corporate666]

I bet it's Salae.. and they are referring to the discussion of the cheap Chinese copies.

If I am right, then I think they are better off leaving well enough alone.  I have a Salae Logic unit and I really like it.  It's priced right, made very well and it works great.  I can't imagine trying to save a few bucks on a Chinese knock off.  As I remember, when someone talked about the Chinese copy and it's price, he was quite roundly criticized and the unit was panned around here.

[amyk]

I bet it's Salae.. and they are referring to the discussion of the cheap Chinese copies.

If I am right, then I think they are better off leaving well enough alone.  I have a Salae Logic unit and I really like it.  It's priced right, made very well and it works great.  I can't imagine trying to save a few bucks on a Chinese knock off.  As I remember, when someone talked about the Chinese copy and it's price, he was quite roundly criticized and the unit was panned around here.

Big company, and "a competing Chinese product", so I doubt it...

[zapta]

I'm not following anyone's advice, I followed my own.

And I thought that when you said 'discuss' you were soliciting for ideas.

Anyway, if you can't give the company name, how about the MD5 hash?  It is non reversible.

[echen1024]

I would bet it's Owon, due to the fact they named their new line the "TDS Series." Siglent SDS2k is possible as well, due to the SPO and the length of which the discussion has gone on.

[JoeyP]

I bet it's Salae.. and they are referring to the discussion of the cheap Chinese copies.

If I am right, then I think they are better off leaving well enough alone.  I have a Salae Logic unit and I really like it.  It's priced right, made very well and it works great.  I can't imagine trying to save a few bucks on a Chinese knock off.  As I remember, when someone talked about the Chinese copy and it's price, he was quite roundly criticized and the unit was panned around here.

Big company, and "a competing Chinese product", so I doubt it...

Ya, and the cat's been out of the bag for so long with Saleae and USBee that it would be quite pointless to try to undo it now anyway. Ebay is absolutely littered with their clones even though it is extremely easy to get eBay to delete a listing over any alleged IP infringement (takes a single email to have a listing removed within hours), yet they haven't even bothered to do that. Can't imagine they'd try something like this.