when can you call it your own circuit?

[mojotron]

that's a good point... but i don't want to rip them off.

we all know how cheap parts actually are.  i added up everything, and $50 is far more than doubling the price of parts.

maybe $100 for normals and $50 for forum members...

I would price your time at $50-100/hour if you work efficiently and make a few at a time. I don't think the market is that price sensitive as long as you are within norms or are competing with a completely saturated product. So, $30 for parts and $75 for your time = $105

[zachary vex]

previous precedents have shown that if you take the BSIABII tone control and put it between a couple of SHO's then you are an originator and everyone else is a copycat.

claiming that a circuit is "yours" is like staking claim to land in the wild west. just say its yours and slander everyone who disagrees with you.

cheers
ulysses

You're obsessed.

[widdly]

  huh?

anyway might breadboard that hysterias oscillator up and check it out.  looks interesting

[the_random_hero]

huh?

Now is a good idea to not get involved, or we'll end up with another good thread locked because of a few certain individuals.

[grolschie]

"Do nothing original, bash the real innovators, and wantonly reverse-engineer and publish other's proprietary work and intellectual property - the philosophy of analguruess and his copycat friends."

Hey, this kind of childish personal attack is not koshure.

[Meanderthal]

 Agreed. I was under the impression that blatant(and for that matter, constant) personal attacks against forum members were not allowed.  Or maybe it's OK for a privilaged few?

Ya know, it's that kinda petty hostile BS that's driving folks outta here. I can't see how that benefits anyone, especially the one doing the attacking.  Respect is about much more than who accomplished what, or how significant those accomplishments are, it's also about how folks treat others, among other things.

Oh, the hell with it, why waste my time, I'm paddling upstream.  Have fun guys...

[BubbaKahuna]

I asked a good friend about this recently when designing a derivative circuit I was working on.
He's a senior design engineer who's worked for companies like Intel, AMD and others.
He was actually on the design team for the 286 chip if that means anything to anyone.
Basically, the guy knows his stuff when it comes to intellectual property rights of electronics & related stuff (that's why I asked him).

His answer to me was that if you're taken to court over your design on a circuit, you'll have to show at least 25% original design on something that already exists or you're in a legal gray area where a judgment can go either way depending on all kinds of things beyond your control. Most (smart) companies will try to make sure that new designes are more like 40% original if they don't feel like being taken to court every other week. I also worked for Intel for a few years in San Jose, CA as a safety instructor. You should see the legal department there. It's a friggin city in itself. 

This is second hand information from someone I trust to know what he's talking about, but someone you don't know from Adam.
Take it as you see fit & at your own risk.

Cheers,
- JJ

[oldschoolanalog]

The 25% original design thing is a bit grey area itself. What constitutes 25% of a circuit? Component count? More "blocks" of additional circuitry? Who decides all this? I guess that's why they have BIG legal departments.
                                                                                                                                                                                                       

[BubbaKahuna]

The 25% original design thing is a bit grey area itself. What constitutes 25% of a circuit? Component count? More "blocks" of additional circuitry? Who decides all this? I guess that's why they have BIG legal departments.                                                                                                                                                                                                   

I'm sure that pretty much sums it up!
I asked the same question and was told it's a guideline Intel looks for and they like it if their people shoot for more like 40%.
40% of what is for their internal people to figure out, I'm not privy to all that.

The modern breed of attorneys and judges who decide technical cases are not the same kind of people who decided cases like Apple vs. Intel over Windows. Back in those days (the early 80s) most judges had no concept of technical issues, nor did many of the lawyers representing the people in the cases. Now, these are all people who have doctorates in both Law and Engineering fields. I knew a lot of people I worked with in Silicon Valley who had more than 4 PHDs, many of them still only in their 30s.
Usually they were pretty humble about it and even made jokes like "Q: What does PHD stand for? A: Piled High & Deep". 
You can thank a molecular biologist at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories for that one!
When people say "America's Top Scientists" ... these are the people they're talking about ... and some of them are also LAWYERS! 

I seriously doubt that component count is a factor. You could practically double that by simply halving/doubling values on most passive components by paralleling or stacking them in series and still have functionally the same circuit. For example, I doubt by changing all your 100k resistors to a pair of 50k resistors in series or a couple 200k in parallel that you'd convince a judge that you invented a whole lot of anything. 

I think the point is that if you're going to take something else, 'fix it' for your own use, it better be more than a few different components and a new PCB layout. 

Cheers!

[mojotron]

...I also worked for Intel for a few years in San Jose, CA as a safety instructor. You should see the legal department there. It's a friggin city in itself. 
...

I did some time at Intel - the Intel Jones Farm site has a pretty big area of legale types as well. It has to suck when all your that big of a target!

[grolschie]

Agreed. I was under the impression that blatant(and for that matter, constant) personal attacks against forum members were not allowed.  Or maybe it's OK for a privilaged few?

Yup. Aron is well aware of zvex's sig, and does nothing about it. Draw your own conclusions.