Schematic Copyrights

Hi I know this can be an issue around here, wonder if anyone would like to share their experience on the subject.
Like how close can a schematic be to another before its considered copyright infringement?

Like no one can copyright a buffer opamp topology right? that would be like someone copyrighting the blues progression.

example: If there is a FET compressor design and you change around a couple resistors ETC then are you able to say it YOUR design and do whatever with it?

If a piece of equipment is old and out of production surely it is far game after a while? or no?

Curious I am

Thanks!

The copyright of a schematic is only on the actual drawing, not the circuit. That means, unless you post an original drawing
by a manufacturer, everything is fair (or more like legal) game. So, because it just came up on the drawing board, I'll use the
API2500 as an example. In case you want to copy that, buy one, draw the schematic, and do whatever you want with it.
Post it here if you want. It is your artwork because you have drawn it, and you own the copyright to that. If you wanted to,
you could design a pcb from it, and start producing it tomorrow. Nobody can stop you from doing so. Or, maybe you found
the original circuit drawing by API. Redraw it yourself, then it is again your artwork and you are free to do whatever you want.
This is a 100% legal and nobody could sue you for doing so.

The way this is mostly handled on this forum, to say that only out of production units are copied or so called legacy units,
is purely an ethical thing. No law enforces that.

I obviously ignored patents, but only because they don't play as much of a role in the audio industry. In case you stumble across
a unit that contains something that was patented by someone and the patent hasn't expired yet, it is still legal to copy that
for your private purposes. At least according to German/European patent law, I would guess it's similar elsewhere. Patents
are not only a means to protect an idea, they also serve the purpose to bring this idea to the surface for everyone, so you
can further build upon that or use it as inspiration.

Generally is the case but not from a legal point of view.

Strictly speaking you can not re-produce an intellectual property which is under copyright without the consent of the copyright owner. Check the books, architectural drawings, engineering drawings etc. and see what it generally says. 

Apart from the impracticalities of policing an intellectual property 24/7, there is a general tolerance within the industry but that still does not warrant anybody to re-produce without the consent of the owner.

I think in general you're right, but de facto copyright law not applies to circuits,
as far as I understand. Only the "drawing" being being an "artwork".

Mr. Orman sums it up here pretty well.
Also read the linked document on Copyright Information for more details.


I happen to have a patent lawyer in my family, I'll talk to her later, might give even more insights.

the API2500 has some patented circuits

That makes sense. So its like a song maybe, you really can't copyright chords and parts, and if someone made their own version and released it would be ok (from a legal point of view). But the more it is like the original the more chance of criticism  and speculation I'd probably receive from others.

That is a good link Volker. Really clears up some of the legal stuff I've been wondering about. While we all agree its never to cool to steal/exploit other peoples work, I've always wondered how different circuits are handled from a legal point of view.

Thanks all
AC

Good link there.  

Remember none of this will prevent you from being summoned to court, or from receiving a cease and desist notice, and that easily applies to making reproduction circuit boards available to the public.  

More than people want to think, a lot of it is like cooking.  Two people can follow the same recipe, one may serve it in a 5 star restaurant to high accolades and the other may make inedible junk, and everything in between.  

Some of my outrageous thinking back over there:

http://www.groupdiy.com/index.php?topic=39696.msg495719#msg495719

volker said:

I think in general you're right, but de facto copyright law not applies to circuits,
as far as I understand. Only the "drawing" being being an "artwork".

Mr. Orman sums it up here pretty well.
Also read the linked document on Copyright Information for more details.

I happen to have a patent lawyer in my family, I'll talk to her later, might give even more insights.

Click to expand...

Oh dear! Welcome to my funeral  ;D

Joke aside, good stuff, lets see what the expert says.

However, I checked the link.

Since we are discussing cloning of effect boxes in this article, I'll limit the discussion of copyrights to that area. A schematic drawing can be copyrighted... the copyright then protects the drawing (schematic) from other people displaying, selling, distributing, copying or making derivatives of it without your permission. It provides no protection whatsoever for the circuit depicted therein - anyone can take the schematic, build a box from it and sell it without violating the copyright on the schematic.

Click to expand...

True, you will not be violating the copyright but you will be violating the design right which is another matter.

...... Even re-drawing the schematic to use on your web site is an infringement if it significantly resembles the original! (so says my IP lawyer)

Click to expand...

As I indicated.

+1 on the good link.  Makes me wonder how sites such as music parts daht com can get away with selling downloads of other people's copyrighted work.

[silent:arts] said:

the API2500 has some patented circuits

Click to expand...

Oh darn it! ;D Anyway, it was just an example and I think I made the facts clear enough.

sahib said:

...... Even re-drawing the schematic to use on your web site is an infringement if it significantly resembles the original! (so says my IP lawyer)

Click to expand...

As I indicated.

Click to expand...

Actually you have to read this as: if the new drawing resembles too much the original drawing,
from an "artistic" point of view. Not the similarity between the actual interpretations of the same
circuit both represent, but the way it is drawn. And of course there are more or less endless
possibilities to present the same idea in a schematic in different ways...


Without going too much into detail, she pretty much confirmed what I wrote above/can be read
on Jack Orman's page. To summarize: without a patent, a circuit is not protected from someone
else using it any way he wants. Copyright law does not apply. There is also the Utility model law,
but it's not always appropriate and has to be applied for as well.