-
@JoeyP, what is your position on refilling your ink and toner for the printer? and on using compatible catridges, and consumerable? I think the ultimate fairness is in the heart, but what the designer and manufacturer trying to claim. There are too many things that anti-monopolistic law cannot guard against, and end users do not know what kind of bargain they are sleep walking most of the time,. Not to mention all the half-truth and untruth being being used to mislead.
As the riggol test equipment, morally you are more right than wrong, but this is EE forum, and people who hack it do not really benefited financially apart from the fun of doing so. Even if they are charged in court, the judge shall see how much the hacker has gained, and how much Riggol has lost. The hacking game is just pure fun, and not for the added bandwidth, and Fun is not what Rigol is selling. And due to the added fun, this has actually benefited Rigol is selling more scope. -
I don't agree. If someone cleans out my lab, I can buy new stuff. But for example, if someone happened to have just one great idea in their life, and turned it into a product, and someone killed it with a clone
If somebody only has one good idea rattling around in their head, why does the world owe it to them that they can be the only person to ever use that idea? That's like saying if someone can only push a broom once, they should be paid for that work for the rest of their life...
If someone cleans out my lab, I will have to work my ass off to buy new stuff. It's quite expensive. I'm sure I can shit out an idea or three in as much time... -
I've never seen you appreciate it, but admittedly haven't read every post you've ever made. I did read many of your posts regarding hacking of the Rigol units
Classic straw man bait'n'switch. I'm not buying into.QuoteJust like the person who copied your videos is stealing by benefiting from your efforts against your will.
I paid for and own my Rigol. I stole nothing, I copied nothing. I broke no copyright laws. Comparing that to someone who copies my copyrighted videos is just crazy.
[/quote]
I bring it up at this time in this thread because I think you can better appreciate the issue after being stung by it personally.
[/quote]
Thanks, but my stuff has been copied as way back as the 1980's, nothing "new" about being "stung by it personally"I didn't say you personally promoted this particular clone. I said that this and others are often promoted in your forum, and that you do have a choice in the matter (as policy maker). Yes, I do think it's wrong to allow them to be promoted. I have not seen any hesitance on your part to delete posts with which you didn't agree either for policy reasons (which is understandable), or political persuasion (or so it seems). You certainly have that right because it's your forum.
And I explained why I don't delete them, and I think I have a very good case for doing so that includes the desire to stop it from happening further by exposure of the issue, education, and community discussion. Your argument is simply "I don't like it, it should be deleted".
Do not throw in the straw man of deleting other obscene/unwanted posts, they are not the same thing.You personally could change that - if in no other way than to promote the idea that it's actually wrong.
There are 500+ posts on this forum a day. Expecting me to read and give a personal response on every issue is not practical.QuoteIf you're saying that there's been no action because you haven't been aware of the posts, then I'd be happy to point them out to you in future.
Why, so I attend to your personal pet hate at your every whim?
No thanks.
If I did that for your and your pet topic I'd have to do it for everyone and their pet topic. -
If somebody only has one good idea rattling around in their head, why does the world owe it to them that they can be the only person to ever use that idea? That's like saying if someone can only push a broom once, they should be paid for that work for the rest of their life...
So you don't believe in patents, copyrights or any other form of IP protection. Noted. I created an extreme example to make the point. Doesn't matter whether he had one idea in his life, or was a reglar genius like you. The principle is the same. In my life, my ideas have turned out to be far more valuable than the stuff in my lab. If your lab is so precious, get insurance.If someone cleans out my lab, I will have to work my ass off to buy new stuff. It's quite expensive. I'm sure I can shit out an idea or three in as much time...
If you can shit out lucrative ideas so easily, then it should be nothing to make enough money from them to rebuild your lab.
-
Why, so I attend to your personal pet hate at your every whim?
No thanks.
If I did that for your and your pet topic I'd have to do it for everyone and their pet topic.
No. I think you should do it because you say you care. But the very fact that you would make this comment tells me you really don't. So I refer you to my original comments. -
You can't fix stupid (or trolls).
I think it's flattering that someone would copy you. Must be doing something right! -
If somebody only has one good idea rattling around in their head, why does the world owe it to them that they can be the only person to ever use that idea? That's like saying if someone can only push a broom once, they should be paid for that work for the rest of their life...
So you don't believe in patents, copyrights or any other form of IP protection. Noted. I created an extreme example to make the point. Doesn't matter whether he had one idea in his life, or was a reglar genius like you. The principle is the same. In my life, my ideas have turned out to be far more valuable than the stuff in my lab. If your lab is so precious, get insurance.
Patents? Nope. Just because I found a way to make the laws of physics conspire to do something cool doesn't mean I should be able to stop you from doing that too. Copyright? Yes. I can't deny you a use of the laws of physics (ethically), but no, you should not be able to just copy and paste my work. You want to do the same thing? Great. Do it yourself.
As for the clones... I don't think it's theft. I don't think it should be illegal. The parts on the Saleae board are already available from retailers. But if you make a clone of it, trying to profit off their development work, then you are a dickhead for whom I have no respect. Laws shouldn't make it illegal to be a dickhead, and there are ways to be a dickhead that are not theft.
I could agree that making a clone and labeling it "Saleae" is theft - I saw this posted in a thread a few days ago. In that case, yes, you are trying to steal customers by lying and saying you are Saleae. (Now, the thing looked like one of my dog's turds, so whether they would succeed at that is another story....)In my life, my ideas have turned out to be far more valuable than the stuff in my lab. If your lab is so precious, get insurance.
The fact that you point out that which of these two things is worse depends on somebody's personal experience just proves that they are completely disparate, incomparable things... -
You can't fix stupid (or trolls).
It's good you warned us about your next comment before you made it.I think it's flattering that someone would copy you. Must be doing something right!
(Wow) -
In my life, my ideas have turned out to be far more valuable than the stuff in my lab. If your lab is so precious, get insurance.
The fact that you point out that which of these two things is worse depends on somebody's personal experience just proves that they are completely disparate, incomparable things...
Agreed. But it doesn't mean either is without value. -
No. I think you should do it because you say you care. But the very fact that you would make this comment tells me you really don't. So I refer you to my original comments.
Oh FFS. If I see such a thread then I may very well feel compelled to comment on it. Actually, I think I recall doing so on one occasion on the clone device, but I could be mistaken (live show maybe?). In either case, I'm saying so NOW ok?
Or will you not be happy until I go and vigorously defend every instance of this that ever happened or will happen?
I care about a LOT of stuff, but like I said I can't possibly go and defend every one of them in every instance, in every thread to satisfy everyone's whim.
You are being complete idiotic. -
Whenever people go for the "it's stealing" argument, they automatically lose the debate.
There is a reason that IP theft and tangible property theft are very different. While I am sure Dave is not happy that someone infringed his copyrights by taking his videos, he is not as upset as he would be if he showed up at the lab tomorrow and it was cleaned out.
When people want to equate IP infringement with theft, they are - by definition - overstating their case. It's just like when people drag out hitler/nazi references whenever they feel wronged
I don't agree. If someone cleans out my lab, I can buy new stuff. But for example, if someone happened to have just one great idea in their life, and turned it into a product, and someone killed it with a clone - they've taken away that person's livelihood, which is far more valuable than the stuff in a lab. When you steal IP, you steal "time" spent developing it. Since we don't live forever, time is far more precious than that "tangible" stuff in the lab.
You don't have to agree, it's established and codified in law that tangible theft is more serious than IP theft. Many IP owners have a naive idea that it's copycats that are keeping them from making it rich, but that is pretty much never the case. Many IP owners think that if someone has their IP without payment, that took $$ from their pocket. In many (most) cases, it didn't. I would say the vast majority of those who would copy something are not people who would otherwise pay for it. It's just a crutch IP owners use.
But even if you don't agree, you are an extra step removed from that situation, because Dave isn't stealing anything. You are criticizing him for not being more outspoken about it. I think your criticism of Dave on this is sorely misplaced. -
In my life, my ideas have turned out to be far more valuable than the stuff in my lab. If your lab is so precious, get insurance.
The fact that you point out that which of these two things is worse depends on somebody's personal experience just proves that they are completely disparate, incomparable things...
Agreed. But it doesn't mean either is without value.
You said they were both theft! 
....screw it, I'm done. -
Why discuss bullshit "Saleae clone" (the hardware) don't violate any law.
Please don't bla bla bla ..... -
But even if you don't agree, you are an extra step removed from that situation, because Dave isn't stealing anything. You are criticizing him for not being more outspoken about it. I think your criticism of Dave on this is sorely misplaced.
Anytime anyone criticises someone for something they didn't say, instantly loses, and has egg on their face. -
If you can shit out lucrative ideas so easily, then it should be nothing to make enough money from them to rebuild your lab.
A minor point, but ideas aren't worth much at all, if anything. Execution is everything. That is, in large part, why the "theft" some feign outrage over doesn't really ever put anyone out of business due to the "theft". -
I think their was a Saleae clone a while back which was a direct firmware copy and sold with the official Saleae software on the CD?
I reckon most people would find that wrong and wouldn't knowingly buy a product like that
-
In my life, my ideas have turned out to be far more valuable than the stuff in my lab. If your lab is so precious, get insurance.
The fact that you point out that which of these two things is worse depends on somebody's personal experience just proves that they are completely disparate, incomparable things...
Agreed. But it doesn't mean either is without value.
You said they were both theft!
....screw it, I'm done.
Maybe I misunderstood you. But what I meant was, both tangible property and intellectual property have value and both can be and are stolen. In the case of the Saleae clone, people seem to conveniently point to how simiple the hardware is (and I agree, it ain't much). But that simple hardware only performs the functions you seek *if* it is used with the software from Saleae - and that's were you are benefiting from Saleae's efforts without paying for them. -
I think their was a Saleae clone a while back which was a direct firmware copy and sold with the official Saleae software on the CD?
I reckon most people would find that wrong and wouldn't knowingly buy a product like that
So it's OK to use clone hardware with the Saleae software if you download it directly from Saleae's website, but not OK if it is distributed by the clone supplier? Either way Saleae didn't get compensated for their efforts - but you benefited from them, and the clone vendor was rewarded for producing clones. -
and that's were you are benefiting from Saleae's efforts without paying for them.
I never said you're* not benefiting from their efforts without paying. Nobody would say that, that's just retarded. But so is your assertion that you should never benefit from something without paying!
Neighbor fixes up their house. Property value in the area goes up. Should I pay them for that?
Took a book out from the library. Should the publisher get a check in the mail with my name on it?
Turned on the radio. Should the record label get a check in the mail with my name on it?
All of these things are paid for by someone else and my enjoyment of them is a side effect.
Now, that doesn't mean it's perfectly kosher for me to go selling Saleae ripoffs either, but it does mean your argument is smelly bullshit that doesn't work when applied to other cases...
Now I'm going away for real, I'm going to bed...
*Apologies for the bloody slaughter of the word "you" in these sentences, the grammar Nazi in me wants to go commit suicide now... -
Whenever people go for the "it's stealing" argument, they automatically lose the debate.
You don't have to agree, it's established and codified in law that tangible theft is more serious than IP theft.
Anything seem in-congruent about these two statements? -
Yes, a mildly careless use of words that does nothing to undermine the argument. Next!
-
I never said you're* not benefiting from their efforts without paying. Nobody would say that, that's just retarded. But so is your assertion that you should never benefit from something without paying!
That's NOT my assertion. I said you shouldn't benefit from anyone's efforts *against their will* (and specifically in the context of IP in this discussion). Saleae's intent is to *sell* their product and benefit from the fruits of their labor. Using their software with a clone denies them that benefit against their will.
There are many many times it it is perfectly normal and reasonable to benefit from the efforts of another without paying. For example, when someone puts something (e.g. software) in the public domain, or makes a charitable contribution. -
Whenever people go for the "it's stealing" argument, they automatically lose the debate.
You don't have to agree, it's established and codified in law that tangible theft is more serious than IP theft.
Anything seem in-congruent about these two statements?
Not at all.
You first equivocated IP theft with tangible property theft. I disagreed, and you said that, actually, IP theft was worse. I simply pointed out that the law does not agree with you - either that IP theft is worse, or that property theft is the same as IP theft. It's not really a matter of opinion, it's written into law. It was you who rolled everything into one blanket charge of "theft". -
You know what? We've gotten so far off of why everyone was jumping on you in the first place, which is that you hijacked a thread where Dave complained about theft to accuse him of supporting it.
Nobody here disagrees with you that selling Saleae clones is wrong, though we might think calling it 'theft' is idiotic.
I could not care less about whether you think it's right or wrong to profit off people against their will. Either continue to put forward your accusation against Dave (which is complete bullshit by the way), retract it and apologize like a big boy, or go climb back in your argumentative hole (and I will climb into mine).
I've contributed to way too many thread derailings. You made this about support of IP violation, not definition of IP violation. Continue the discussion or end it. -
I think another main issue that no-one has commented on, is that the person is not just copying the videos, but using his likeness, if someone asks a question on those videos, and the re-uploader responds, it could be assumed by the person who asked the question that the uploader is the guy in the video.
As to discussion as to copying hardware/software, I agree with whatever side thinks that it is wrong to blatantly copy an existing design. Tangible theft is the exact same as IP theft, however IP theft is a lot harder to prove.
On the "hacking" side, I am more lenient. I say go nuts if you are writing code, or changing the function of a circuit to improve it (or modify to your needs). With the code hacking (as what happened with the Rigol scopes) to improve something that is decidedly hardware locked by the manufacture, I'm a little more cautious. In the end I think it is "okay" as we don't know if the scopes were 'binned' so we don't know if the lower bandwidth models are that way due to some underlying faults (but lets face it, I doubt there is). We the users have the risk if we hack them as to the results that we will get from the device, and the fact that hacking them as we are will completely void the manufacturer warranty, so it is the end users problem for any faults and damages.
-kizzap