General > General Technical Chat
"Giving away secrets" of electronics?
<< < (10/18) > >>
DavidAlfa:
Entered thinking it was a nice book or something, "Secrets of electronics" but no way!
niconiconi:

--- Quote from: IanB on November 23, 2022, 05:06:20 am ---
--- Quote from: niconiconi on November 23, 2022, 04:05:43 am ---Copyright only applies to the particular representation (e.g. drawing or writing) of a fact, not the fact itself. So a particular engineering drawing is copyrighted, and it's often a copyright violation to copy the original drawing. But it's underlying circuit netlist, topology, design, or even component values are not. Everyone else is free to replicate the same circuit independently. As long as the original drawing is not copied, copyright does not apply and is not violated.
--- End quote ---

This is an example of where the law is illogical and wrong.

In music, copyright applies to a particular sequence of notes ("a fact"), and not the expression of that fact, nor merely the manuscript where the sequence of notes is written down.

It is completely illogical that if someone replicates (copies for gain) the same arrangement of components that was composed into a circuit by someone else, that they are not infringing a copyright. Why is an arrangement of musical notes protectable, but an arrangement of electronic components not? There is a double standard at work here.

--- End quote ---

This double-standard is known as the "Useful Articles doctrine" under the US copyright laws (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_law_of_the_United_States#Useful_articles) , and, as far as I know, it has been the rule for centuries since the very beginning of copyright. Essentially, copyright laws are primarily applied to artistic works, not functional works. While there is no shortage of creative and artistic elements in a functional engineering work, but first and foremost it's a practical object with an intrinsic utilitarian function. Thus, under the laws, the functional aspect of these objects are largely excluded from copyright laws deliberately, and is instead lies in the realm of patent laws (you can certainly create a pure artwork with circuit components, and that will be copyrighted as any work of art, but it's not the case for 99.9% of the electronic systems in existence)

The US Copyright Office says:


--- Quote ---A “useful article” is an object having an intrinsic utilitarian function that is not merely to portray the appearance of the article or to convey information. Examples are clothing, furniture, machinery, dinnerware, and lighting fixtures. An article that is normally part of a useful article may itself be a useful article, for example, an ornamental wheel cover on a vehicle.

Copyright does not protect the mechanical or utilitarian aspects of such works of craftsmanship. It may, however, protect any pictorial, graphic, or sculptural authorship that can be identified separately from the utilitarian aspects of an object. Thus, a useful article may have both copyrightable and uncopyrightable features. For example, a carving on the back of a chair or a floral relief design on silver flatware could be protected by copyright, but the design of the chair or flatware itself could not.

Some designs of useful articles may qualify for protection under the federal patent law.

Copyright in a work that portrays a useful article extends only to the artistic expression of the author of the pictorial, graphic, or sculptural work. It does not extend to the design of the article that is portrayed. For example, a drawing or photograph of an automobile or a dress design may be copyrighted, but that does not give the artist or photographer the exclusive right to make automobiles or dresses of the same design.

--- End quote ---

In the words of Bruce Perens,


--- Quote ---Think of the problems we would have if this were otherwise: we would not be able to use the schematics that we learned in books in our products, and the practice of electronics would be stifled. Designs published in ham radio magazines back to the 1910's would have to be licensed. Even antenna designs! Even wire antenna designs! Everything we did with electronics would grind to a halt. Electronics already has enough bad intellectual property law under the patent regime, we don't want more based on copyright.

--- End quote ---
T3sl4co1l:

--- Quote from: IanB on November 23, 2022, 02:22:26 am ---
--- Quote from: T3sl4co1l on November 23, 2022, 01:47:08 am ---I suppose you've never seen your hard-earned work copied effortlessly and for pennies on the dollar by Chinese suppliers?
--- End quote ---

There's a remedy for copying the work of others, it's called copyright. It is a legal tool used extensively by artists, musicians, authors, and many others. Engineers should make more use of it.

--- End quote ---

Engineers*... specifically can't use copyright.  That's why the PTO exists!

e.g. offhand, https://www.lendio.com/blog/patents-copyrights-trademarks/

*Except for source code (software engineers), which is copyrightable.  Sometimes both, but that's its own can of worms.

Note: whether or not patents are meaningful, useful, novel in a more broad sense -- is aside the point.  They are a legal fiction and any real-world notions about them are strictly inapplicable -- or at least until tested as such in a court of law.  Legal fact is different from scientific fact is different from (even more abstract, or such that it can exist) philosophical fact.  While it would be nice if these were in fact all the same, for a variety of good and bad reasons, they are not!

Tim
T3sl4co1l:

--- Quote from: IanB on November 23, 2022, 05:06:20 am ---In music,
--- End quote ---

This is an even murkier topic, as it carries its own specific case law:
https://www.stockmusicmusician.com/blog/music-licensing-the-3-types-of-rights
(disclaimer: didn't read this either for any kind of validation, just the top result to introduce the subject)

Tim
JohanH:
Music industry is crazy. In many cultures, music is a way of telling stories and in the past even an important way of transferring knowledge and information between people and from previous generations to later generations. I'm convinced it still has this role to some extent. Now if you sit around a camp fire in the US and sing a song, you could get sued. How stupid is that.
Navigation
Message Index
Next page
Previous page
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...

Go to full version
Powered by SMFPacks Advanced Attachments Uploader Mod