Re: Tube Troubles

in article byrnsj-465340.13555420082008@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, John
Byrns at byrnsj@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote on 8/20/08 2:55 PM:

In article <C4D1D975.CD790%jono_1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Jon Yaeger <jono_1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

in article byrnsj-3EE011.13132420082008@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, John
Byrns at byrnsj@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote on 8/20/08 2:13 PM:

In article
<20e8c68f-07c0-4b68-a29f-58a89e7f4b74@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Peter Wieck <pfjw@xxxxxxx> wrote:

On Aug 19, 6:15 pm, Bob Perilstein <Bob.Perilstein.
2f13...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Mr. Turner,
You mentioned well back into your boorish diatribe that you too
purchased a "Hong Kong" labeled amp 1 or 2 years ago. I believe that
makes you a complete hippocrite.

--
Bob Perilstein

Bob:

Patrick can derive all of the items he mentioned based on many
thousands of hours of hands-on experience. For him, purchasing the
'competition' is a useful exercise in learning. Much as Ford, Mercedes
or Fiat purchase vehicles from their competition for reverse-
engineering and learning purposes.

Is reverse engineering of this sort legal? Many years ago, before the
creation
of this group, this subject came up in the rec.audio.tech group where the
statement was made that reverse engineering was illegal because it violates
the
manufacturers copyright on the design. Anyone have any thoughts on this
issue?


AFAIK, you are free to disassemble and document anything you buy unless
there is a ULA or other contractual document specifically enjoining you from
doing so.

Yes, I understand that restriction.

However, publishing or sharing the information thus gleaned would likely be
an actionable tort and a possible basis for a civil contest.

This is the part that I don't understand, how documentation you create on a
reverse engineered design can violate any copyright on the original design
documents, they would seem to be different works?

*** I am sure there is sufficient precedent law for this case; I'm not an
attorney and my grasp of intellectual property law revolves mostly around
software licensing. Remember, any party can bring suit against another for
a perceived breach and away they go . . .

Other trade
secrets are protected under Federal statutes and different circumstances
apply.

I thought "trade secrets" were protected by, well being kept secret? That
there
are laws against misappropriating trade secrets, like stealing them by means
such as industrial espionage, but that "trade secrets" are not protected
against
someone observing the operation of a device and building a competing product
using the so called "trade secrets"? In other words "trade secret" protection
only applies as long as secrecy is maintained?

*** Pardon my semantic fog. What I meant to say -- instead of trade secret
-- is the more general "proprietary and confidential info" and "intellectual
property" in general. I can't answer your questions about trade secrets
because I do not know the "correct" answers.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: 8051 was My hat is off to Microchip and their CEO!
    ... manufacturer decides to expose any of that. ... the information needed to get at the guts of the chip. ... of the design rules) but I'd be very surprised to see one publish this ... no trade secrets to protect by not publishing their detailed design? ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
  • Re: GPL encumbrance problems (jdow)
    ... So from a point of view of operability, I dislike trade secrets in the tools I work with. ... some recreational programming for which they get massive egoboost doing so. ... They just need to realize that if they think of going it alone the picture suddenly and dramatically changes. ... I changed fields from RF design to software work - at just the right time to have both hardware RF design and software design associated with most of the GPS satellites currently on orbit. ...
    (Fedora)
  • Re: Tube Troubles
    ... For him, purchasing the ... Is reverse engineering of this sort legal? ... related to hardware documentation derived from reverse engineering. ... mentioning it. ...
    (rec.audio.tubes)
  • Re: McLaren gained a clear advantage and is culpable
    ... If a competitor's trade secrets are handed to you by a disgruntled ... Ferrari's current design. ... approaches Ferrari had tried and found unproductive. ... Actually, the strongest evidence ...
    (rec.autos.sport.f1)
  • Re: Tube Troubles
    ... For him, purchasing the ... engineering and learning purposes. ... Is reverse engineering of this sort legal? ... there is a ULA or other contractual document specifically enjoining you from ...
    (rec.audio.tubes)