Nice Schematics Link

[R.G.]

I am curious R.G.
I rightclicked and printed out lots of your articles so I could study them properly as this laptop is ancient and the monitor is awful I'm half blind.And I cant keep my wife from getting so much malware that surfing the web is more like LA traffic.
SO have I offended you by doing so?

No. Beside the point of offending me, it is explicitly allowed in copyright law to make a personal copy for individual education and study, given that the copy is not a replacement for buying (if there's a buying option), isn't "extensive" (which juries decide), etc. There are provisions for "fair use" in copyright law, which I think are reasonable, and support personally. Although, as an aside, my support for or agreement/disagreement with copyright law is as immaterial as flatulence in the wind. Copyright law is shaped primarily by Big Money buying legislators. I personally think it's ridiculous for Disney to have bought enough US legislators to extend the copyright on Mickey Mouse for another 75 years, for instance, and that it goes far beyond any reasonable application of the creation of "Mickey Mouse" as an artistic expression. But I don't have enough money or influence to change that or any of the other silly aspects of the law. So I work within it as best I can.

I really believe that the silly, and corporate-greedy aspects of copyright law are part of what make (largely) young, thoughtless people think that any protection of copyright is bad and should be flaunted. Our Political Heroes have never learned that making bad laws and selectively or erratically enforcing any of them degrades public respect for ALL laws. It is very handy for governments to set up a situation where most if not all citizens have violated some law of some kind. That way, any citizen can be arrested at any time that's convenient. Ooops... it seems that poor government degrades respect for governments too. 

Long story shortened, sure, make yourself a printed copy for your personal education and reference, with my - and the law's - blessing. This is very different from gathering up things and presenting them on the internet as your "collection" or "archive". If it doesn't appear on your internet site or in the book you publish (which has happened before, by the way!) then there is no issue here. It's there to help you understand electronics and have fun building effects; that IS the purpose.

I would NEVER repost your work but have often linked to your posts and Geo,as I thought that was your meaning.

It was, exactly.

I have great respect for you sharing your knowledge and I thought your intent was to keep other people from making money by reposting your work in order to draw more visits and thus more "pennies per click" on thier DIY sites and blogs whatever.
Anyway I hope I didnt offend you by making use of your web site,I thought that was your reason for having it so people like me could learn from it.

You're right on target. No problems there.

[Brymus]

Cool thanx RG,
I appreciate the help Geo has been to me.And agree completely with your last post!

[Celadine]

<Uncalled for attack on user deleted>

[R.G.]

I've modified my first response. Got my "Sweet Old Bob" persona sorted out. 

R.G. - your attitude sucks.  Your hokey little designs are crap, you should be proud of anyone reposting it as their own.

p.s. - a big middle finger to ya.[/quote]
I'll take that as a "No, I have not (yet?) done the work to design up and/or draw up  something useful to post for others to build."

I think you can do better than that. Give it a try. Do some learning and thinking about how things work and post it for others to use. Put your name on it. I think you might like it.

[panterafanatic]

wait, RG. do you have stuff that you've sold in the past? idfc if i can get it for free by doing a ton searches. do you have books or CDs from before that you can sell? take limewire, i hate it. i've only used it before buying the CD. i prefer a hardcopy. just makes it feel mine. but do you have like a store or something that can be bought, like a book?

edit: i just saw the vacuum wah pedal, firstly, my jaw dropped at the through of 130v pedal but i love the comment about the laywer

[Celadine]

Its been so long since I've dealt with a troll.  You know, the best thing to do is ignore them, or you end up being dragged down to their level.  I'd forgotten that.  R.G. Troll now being ignored.  Ah, its 2003 again!   

[R.G.]

Its been so long since I've dealt with a troll.  You know, the best thing to do is ignore them, or you end up being dragged down to their level.  I'd forgotten that.  R.G. Troll now being ignored.  Ah, its 2003 again!   

Bravo! I think, on balance that this is the smart strategy for you to take. It was, after all, you who came up with the clever, witty, and insightful:

R.G. - your attitude sucks.  Your hokey little designs are crap, you should be proud of anyone reposting it as their own.
p.s. - a big middle finger to ya.

It's a classic approach. If you can't keep up in a discussion of ideas, resort to profanity. And when called on it, blame the victim.

But let's stay with facts, OK? I asked:

when have you posted a schematic on the internet that you personally drew from the start, and where can we find those?

I can point to mine. Can you point to yours?

And since we know from your post that:

When I post a schematic on the internet, I expect someone to take it and do whatever with it.

which I read as you declaring that anything you post is public domain, for me, or anyone else, to take any materials you post and use them however I/they see fit. Is that right? Or do you only make this offer with stuff you've copied from other people?

Or would you rather talk about something else? Trolls *like* shiny things... 

[aron]

I'm giving Celadine a little time to cool down and think things out while he reads this thread:

http://www.diystompboxes.com/smfforum/index.php?topic=60421.0

[ibodog]

Had a nice unplug from the net with a little mini-trip to South Dakota to celebrate my 40th with my extended family.  It's a 5 hour drive one way and nice for giving things a think-over while driving past all the corn fields once I get my wife and daughter settled down in the van.  I want to post some of my thoughts before I address any more responses to my posts in this thread.

A large part of my personal experience with copyright stems from music recordings done back in the 90's which are actually registered with the US Copyright Office.  That is an interesting yet boring paperwork process, sending the copyright office copies of the material in question, and costs some money.  We had to make some choices as to what category to register the copyright under which has an impact on how much it costs.  In the end we went with the cheapest route which was to register the entire album of original material as a single "sound recording".  This gave decent coverage against bootlegs or having some of the recording lifted and used somewhere else.  It doesn't really address the original songs or having someone else re-record one of our songs and releasing it as their own.  For that you register on a per song basis as a "musical work".  Since each song needs to be registered separately as a "musical work" that costs more money.  I think the fee now is $50 per submission for most things.  Back then I seem to remember it being less - maybe around $35 per submission.  Adds up fast when you think about properly registering a 10 song album.   Registering a copyright is an important step to "put the teeth" into your copyright in case push comes to shove and you need to take someone to court.  Of course registering the copyright isn't an absolute requirement to copyright something.  But it saves everyone a lot of time and money if one is serious about possibly taking action to protect one's copyright.  We copyrighted our music to protect our time investment and $$$ investment in that recording.  Makes sense to everyone, right?

In one of my posts I put a copyright at the bottom.  My guess is that most people's reaction to that would be "that's just silly/stupid" or "he can't really mean that, can he?"  or even "who'd ever want to copy that load of poo?"  OK, maybe R.G. took it seriously, out of habit.    But, I can tell you I didn't bother registering it with the US Copyright Office.    The fact of the matter is anyone who read it has copied it already, without my permission.  Just because I placed it on the internet.  Living things need water, indeed.  Maybe this is covered under "fair use" as a "personal copy"?  I know Disney generally hates that idea though the music biz is starting to warm up to the marketing and promo possibilities that might be opened up by such situations (small time, unauthorized copying).  Would the fact that I posted it on a public bulletin board with the intention of having other people read it and react to it impact the way you feel about my copyright? Do you think it would impact how a court of law might view the situation? I'd hope so.

When you or I or anyone "creates" something - maybe it is/isn't a 100% original creation (ie builds on someone else's work in some way) - there's a moment when you've got something "done" and you're thinking to yourself "I'm going to post/share this with xyz online community".  I think you should ask yourself, "Do I really need copyright law to protect me and my interests with this?"  I just think that most of the time, for most people posting things that are intended to be shared with a DIY community, outside of a commercial publication (or is DIY Stompboxes a commercial publication where Aron has copyrights to everything?), the answer would be "no".  If you're Craig Anderton and you're making a DIY book (or R.G. with his layout book) that you are intending to sell to others, the answer would be "yes". 

I think that somehow my comments and questions on this subject have be taken by most to mean that I don't "believe" in copyright.  That is NOT AT ALL THE CASE.  I just don't think that every little thing needs to be copyrighted.  Sure you CAN copyright whatever you think you want to - and as long as nothing needs to be proven in a court of law you can feel good about it.  But do you really NEED to?  If you think you really need to, you really also need to go through the process of registering your copyright so that it could actually have some teeth once the lawyers got involved.

PS, my apologies to R.G. about the "respect" misquote.  It was someone else who posted that with no one refuting him/her.

Kudos to anyone who's followed my little "essay" this far...

[ibodog]

I just found out that since 1978 copyright protection exists from the time a work is fixed in tangible form!  And since 1989 no copyright notice need be affixed!  And you don't need to publish a work in order for it to qualify for copyright protection.  All that really matters is if people take any infringement actions and how they shake out in court based on what evidence is provided.  But bottom line seems to be that if you're serious about infringements to your work, you'll be a lot better off with a registered copyright.  Without the registration you're likely to only be awarded actual damages and can't claim any punitive damages. 

So I guess one doesn't get a choice whether to copyright or not.  It just IS!  All that's left to shake out is who cares if they think they've been infringed and what they're willing to do about it.  Seriously think about what that means for your everyday activity on the web - especially if you do contribute your work "freely".  It would be easy for someone else to claim you are infringing as a "derivative work" or such.  I mean, if they actually cared to and were willing to spend the money to prove it to a court.

[R.G.]

Yep. You do have to follow what corporate America is getting for their money buying legislators.  They get a lot by just continuing to pay for them as they go and chipping away at things.

As a matter of course, I send update CDs of my stuff to the copyright office. I started that when a particularly nasty piece of work started up his schematic archive, and flatly slandered me on the net when I objected. I was literally days from filing the suit when the materials were removed and apology sent. This schematic archive is still around, but none of my stuff is on it - now at least. That's the event that got me started registering.

When you get time, read some of the write ups on the DCMA. It makes for interesting reading. Someone who has the stance that "information ought to be free" has a good chance of wandering into infringing copyright in a manner which trips the $100,000 damages provision for a *fiirst*, *non-commercial* infringement that the DCMA allows for registered owners. $100K is enough to motivate a junkyard-dog attorney to take a pushover case on contingency.

People who infringe fall into the camps of not knowing the real legal perils, and knowing but thinking that it can't happen to them. The $100K automatic damages provision moves the bar down to a level where an owner with no bankroll to fund a suit up-front can get effective representation.

On the infringer side of things, even if I wanted to copy other stuff, the DMCA would be enough to scare me straight. I *never* put anything on the net that I have not personally drawn up or typed in, and I have the source files to prove that in court. Most people can't pay even for defense lawyers, starting at about $10K - $20K just to get to court, let alone losing a decision.

Whether any of this is right or ethical is beside the point. It is what the law says, and both police and judges who are candid will tell you that in courts you get law (if you're lucky) and not justice.

I am not an attorney, and so anyone who takes what I say as legal advice is seriously misguided. Everyone who is doing something which might possibly have legal ramifications ought to hire their own attorney.

[puretube]

Jesse: thanx for being so reasonable,

and sorry for me not having been the friendly welcomer this time 

Whats so special about that archive?... 

nothing special there, folx - just move on...

...Kinda sick of puretube's nonsense.   

which: "non-sense" ?

[puretube]

Here`s a nice example of illegal rehosting...


let`s see what Mr. Photobucket has to say... 

[Rectangular]

wow, I've never seen that  Tube  Vibwahto  thing before !  Puretube, have you ever released even preliminary "building block" schematics for any of your tube effects ?  I've built all of Eric Barbour's DIY synth stuff, and have been looking for some new tube circuits.

[CynicalMan]

The link posted here doesn't work anymore. The schematics can be found here:

http://www.tremolo.pl/sch/Efekty