¿can a person be sued for designs?

[pucho812]

I know the schematic is considered art and you can sue for it.
I know the layout is something one could be sued for.
But if a person say makes a state variable eq standard parametric eq, how much if any can they get sued for?
if they redraw the layout, and redraw the PCB, is anything really enforceable?
Obviously the look will be different. But is pulling a known topology and turning it into a design anything a person can get sued over?

 

[JohnRoberts]

If the information being copied is already public domain it is free to use. Only very specific intellectual property can be protected but even that is not a slam dunk.

JR

 

[pucho812]

If the information being copied is already public domain it is free to use. Only very specific intellectual property can be protected but even that is not a slam dunk.

JR

I wonder about that.
For example some of the designs I have been monkeying around with are basically the rca tube handbook. If they ever went to market, what could a person get sued for?

 

[JohnRoberts]

I wonder about that.
For example some of the designs I have been monkeying around with are basically the rca tube handbook. If they ever went to market, what could a person get sued for?

The question to consider is what could you lose a lawsuit over?

JR

 

[pucho812]

The question to consider is what could you lose a lawsuit over?

JR

I don’t know which is why I ask.
from all I know
1. Schematic is protected art. But you can get around that by redraw. Not an intention of mine but to my knowledge that is correct.

2. Board layout is also protected, but again you can redo it and you get around that. Again this is to my knowledge.

3.A circuit itself is not protected unless it has a patent on the process.

Am I missing anything? I am certain I am.

So let’s say I create the pucho73. It will never happen but let’s say I did.
If I redraw the schematic and do a different layout, then I can’t get sued, correct? Or let’s say, I copy part for part a small section of a schematic because I like the filters from one piece but love the preamp from another, love the line amp from another and the eq from a fourth?

How would that work if at all from a legal stand point?

 

[sahib]

.... But is pulling a known topology and turning it into a design anything a person can get sued over?

If the topology is known then they also used the same topology and there is nothing to worry about.

If the topology is unknown, in other words has not been made public, but you reverse engineered it and used as your own, then there is the risk of a legal action against you if/when they find out.

At the end of the day if somebody decides to sue you there is nothing that will protect you from it.

However, in the case of your example Pucho73, if I owned Neve, had stash of cash to burn, and decided to make your life a misery then I would look at it from this angle. You are using my circuitry and you are capitalising on the legacy of 1073. I remember from early '80s (before I moved to UK) back in Istanbul I almost bought a book shelf hi-fi set thinking that t was SONY as it was so cheap. But a closer inspection revealed that it was branded SQNY. Do you know what I am getting at? I know it is not exactly the same but it is what made me reach out to that product. Here I don't know if they had also copied Sony's circuitry, I doubt they did. But in your case you are not only capitalising on the brand legacy but also copying the circuitry. So, a much stronger case for a lawyer to persuade me to take a legal action against you (and guarantee the purchase of his next Jag from the money that I had already put aside to burn).

 

[ruffrecords]

To the best of my knowledge:

The circuit itself can only be protected by patent and they run out after 20 years so anything in the RCA HAndbook is fair game.

The actual RCA schematic drawing is protected by copyright which can last 75 or more years. So if you make exact copies of them and sell them you can be sued for copyright infringement.

The same applies in principle to any PCB layout (in the UK you have to register the design to gain this protection, it may be different elsewhere).

So as long as you draw you own schematic of a none patented circuit and create your own unique PCB layout you should be OK.

The other thing to watch out for is not to use registered trade marks (like RCA) so don't call it the RCA mic pre.

Cheers

Ian

 

[Speedskater]

But you will only be sued if you start making real money from it.
Or Monster owns it.

 

[JohnRoberts]

I don’t know which is why I ask.
from all I know
1. Schematic is protected art. But you can get around that by redraw. Not an intention of mine but to my knowledge that is correct.

Schematics can be protected like written text but this is weak protection.

2. Board layout is also protected, but again you can redo it and you get around that. Again this is to my knowledge.

can be copyrighted a form of IP protection different from patents.

3.A circuit itself is not protected unless it has a patent on the process.

only if novel and showing utility.

Am I missing anything? I am certain I am.

It a form of business competition. Large companies amass multiple patents to use in defense and perhaps trade back and forth with other large companies that have a portfolio of patents.

So let’s say I create the pucho73. It will never happen but let’s say I did.
If I redraw the schematic and do a different layout, then I can’t get sued, correct? Or let’s say, I copy part for part a small section of a schematic because I like the filters from one piece but love the preamp from another, love the line amp from another and the eq from a fourth?

How would that work if at all from a legal stand point?

What's a Pucho73? Not another clone.

If the topology is known then they also used the same topology and there is nothing to worry about.

public domain and expired patent IP is free to use

If the topology is unknown, in other words has not been made public, but you reverse engineered it and used as your own, then there is the risk of a legal action against you if/when they find out.

Not if they didn't protect it. How do they prove it was copied? Theft of unprotected IP can be considered as regular old fashioned theft.

At the end of the day if somebody decides to sue you there is nothing that will protect you from it.

The old joke about patents is that they only give you the right to sue, not win. Peavey sued Behringer over their copy of my patented FLS invention. Behringer won by not losing that lawsuit.

However, in the case of your example Pucho73, if I owned Neve, had stash of cash to burn, and decided to make your life a misery then I would look at it from this angle. You are using my circuitry and you are capitalising on the legacy of 1073. I remember from early '80s (before I moved to UK) back in Istanbul I almost bought a book shelf hi-fi set thinking that t was SONY as it was so cheap. But a closer inspection revealed that it was branded SQNY. Do you know what I am getting at? I know it is not exactly the same but it is what made me reach out to that product. Here I don't know if they had also copied Sony's circuitry, I doubt they did. But in your case you are not only capitalising on the brand legacy but also copying the circuitry. So, a much stronger case for a lawyer to persuade me to take a legal action against you (and guarantee the purchase of his next Jag from the money that I had already put aside to burn).

Patent lawsuits and defense is a "deep pockets" game. I have seen small businesses chased (scared) out of a given market by threats of IP lawsuits.

JR

 

[pucho812]

Schematics can be protected like written text but this is weak protection.

can be copyrighted a form of IP protection different from patents.

only if novel and showing utility.

It a form of business competition. Large companies amass multiple patents to use in defense and perhaps trade back and forth with other large companies that have a portfolio of patents.

What's a Pucho73? Not another clone.

public domain and expired patent IP is free to use

Not if they didn't protect it. How do they prove it was copied? Theft of unprotected IP can be considered as regular old fashioned theft.

The old joke about patents is that they only give you the right to sue, not win. Peavey sued Behringer over their copy of my patented FLS invention. Behringer won by not losing that lawsuit.

Patent lawsuits and defense is a "deep pockets" game. I have seen small businesses chased (scared) out of a given market by threats of IP lawsuits.

JR

the Pucho73 was an example. It in theory was a direct copy of a Neve 1073 but different layout, different look.

 

[JohnRoberts]

the Pucho73 was an example. It in theory was a direct copy of a Neve 1073 but different layout, different look.

whats a Neve 1073?

JR

 

[pucho812]

whats a Neve 1073?

JR

I’m sure you jest.
Although I don’t follow the lesson here.

 

[JohnRoberts]

I’m sure you jest.

only half jest.... I know who Neve is.

Although I don’t follow the lesson here.

Then hire a smart lawyer.

JR

 

[pucho812]

only half jest.... I know who Neve is.

Then hire a smart lawyer.

JR

that I understand. thanks

 

[ruffrecords]

Lots of people have cloned the 1073. None of them have been sued AFAIK. The vast majority are far too small a company or badly made product to worry Neve.

Cheers

Ian

 

[pucho812]

Lots of people have cloned the 1073. None of them have been sued AFAIK. The vast majority are far too small a company or badly made product to worry Neve.

Cheers

Ian

Oh that is not a plan by any means but it was mentioned as an example

 

[Ó Draighnáin]

"Design" has a specific meaning in respect of IP rights. It refers to something like shape and or configuration and is typically directed to non-functional aspects (although a new functional feature also has a shape and or configuration...). A design has to be "new" to be registrable. A new toothbrush head shape might be subject of a design right. I don't think you mean "design" in an IP right context? Are you asking about circuit board (internal) layouts? Front panel presentation? Both or the combination?

Patents are not so much of an issue in the field of audio. In any event, inventions filed before about 2000 have expired (unless there is some ever-greening going on).

Trade marks (badges of origin) hold a lot of currency in audio. Also be aware of "passing off" (I think it is "misappropriation" in the US)? (mainly to do badge/name and front panel presentation).

Unless you want to enter the "clone wars" (where you sail as close to the wind as possible (colour, knob configuration and placement, shape of knobs, everything) to try and leech off the good will of those that have gone before), there is probably not too much to be concerned about. But I am not entirely sure what you are asking about.

 

[pucho812]

"Design" has a specific meaning in respect of IP rights. It refers to something like shape and or configuration and is typically directed to non-functional aspects (although a new functional feature also has a shape and or configuration...). A design has to be "new" to be registrable. A new toothbrush head shape might be subject of a design right. I don't think you mean "design" in an IP right context? Are you asking about circuit board (internal) layouts? Front panel presentation? Both or the combination?

Patents are not so much of an issue in the field of audio. In any event, inventions filed before about 2000 have expired (unless there is some ever-greening going on).

Trade marks (badges of origin) hold a lot of currency in audio. Also be aware of "passing off" (I think it is "misappropriation" in the US)? (mainly to do badge/name and front panel presentation).

Unless you want to enter the "clone wars" (where you sail as close to the wind as possible (colour, knob configuration and placement, shape of knobs, everything) to try and leech off the good will of those that have gone before), there is probably not too much to be concerned about. But I am not entirely sure what you are asking about.

Well, trying to avoid law suits. Yes, no clones. But trying to work out how to avoid a lawsuit.

 

[Ó Draighnáin]

Hi Pucho, just trying to be helpful.

I know quite a lot about IP stuff, it is what I do for a living. I also know a bit about some of the "classic" gear having built for example: Pultec, Helios, Gates, EMI, UA, Neumann and Neve clones for personal use (as well as having used Marshall, Vox, Fender, Hiwatt and Supro guitar amp circuits). So I believe myself to be in a reasonable position to be helpful.

It is admittedly hard to provide any specific advice in the context of this forum, and I won't. If I lived in California, I could have a chat with you over a beer, but I don't.

Generally, getting a decent answer to a question like "will I get sued?" requires disclosing a bit more about what you are doing than you may be wililng to on an online forum. And fair enough too. I wouldn't.

You can almost guarantee that when someone is looking to build a clone or something like that (commerically), the first question asked is: "how did they do it a GDIY?" Then along comes the information hoovering. Relatedly, the market niche you think you see might be worth something to somebody.

Of the above, Ian's advice seems the most responsive.

Without knowing the specifics, if it is old tech, you are not infringing trade marks or misappropriating, and you are not copying layouts, then you are probably ok.

All the best.

 

[pucho812]

Hi Pucho, just trying to be helpful.

I know quite a lot about IP stuff, it is what I do for a living. I also know a bit about some of the "classic" gear having built for example: Pultec, Helios, Gates, EMI, UA, Neumann and Neve clones for personal use (as well as having used Marshall, Vox, Fender, Hiwatt and Supro guitar amp circuits). So I believe myself to be in a reasonable position to be helpful.

It is admittedly hard to provide any specific advice in the context of this forum, and I won't. If I lived in California, I could have a chat with you over a beer, but I don't.

Generally, getting a decent answer to a question like "will I get sued?" requires disclosing a bit more about what you are doing than you may be wililng to on an online forum. And fair enough too. I wouldn't.

You can almost guarantee that when someone is looking to build a clone or something like that (commerically), the first question asked is: "how did they do it a GDIY?" Then along comes the information hoovering. Relatedly, the market niche you think you see might be worth something to somebody.

Of the above, Ian's advice seems the most responsive.

Without knowing the specifics, if it is old tech, you are not infringing trade marks or misappropriating, and you are not copying layouts, then you are probably ok.

All the best

Well looking to go commercial at some point. I am also trying to not let the cat out of the bag.
If I combine a preamp from one desk and combine it with eq from another console and put it out as a product, a channel. What could happen?