"Copywrite" on circuits - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: iampoor
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 11, 2015, 06:57:06 pm
content: HiWhat constitutes a circuit in the "public domain" (IE: A sallen key 2nd order low pass filter), and one that's protected by Copywrite? Its always been my understanding that the presentation (schematics, board layout, and article etc) are copywritable, but the circuit itself is not.Here is an example. Lets say you wanted to use Figure 1 in a commercial product, with the same component values in the table. The article (at the bottom) clearly states "Non-commercial use", but isn't this a standard way of building filters!? Im sure there are already many products with the exact same topology.http://sound.westhost.com/project75.htmAre there any general guidelines to follow? I totally understand it if it is clearly a unique design, I am just very confused at how many "copywrites" I see on circuits that are clearly fundamental building blocks!

author: Tandy
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 11, 2015, 07:55:35 pm
content: Copyright is granted to original works of authorship.The actual schematic drawing is a work, so if you were to make a direct copy of the schematic drawing, for example copy an image you found on a website and put it on your own site without permission that would be a violation of copyright.The method of connecting components together described by the schematic is not copyrightable. So if you use the schematic to build your own circuit, even if you sell the circuit you produce it is not a violation. Assuming you created your own PCB for the circuit that you have created an artwork that is protected by copyright. This means someone can not make a direct copy of your PCB artwork without your permission. However if someone wises to figure out your circuit by reverse engineering it and producing their own PCB layout, they are free to do so.If someone publishes a a PCB layout for you to use then you must abide by the rules they set for its use. If you wish to use their PCB layout for a commercial project and the author has stated no-commercial, you will not be able to use it unless you get them to agree to allow it. But you can simply create your own layout from the schematic.The only way you can protect the actual circuit design is to make a circuit that is novel (no-obvious) to apply for a patent. Even then patents can often be worked around simply by arriving at the same result using a slightly different technique.

author: Tandy
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 11, 2015, 08:19:18 pm
content: Perhaps best explained with an example.I come up with an idea that connecting an op-amp to 10kv coil enables me to travel back an hour in time that turns out to be real. This revolutionary discovery could potentially be patented if it can be demonstrated that the implementation of the idea is sufficiently unique. If I apply for a patent, I must not disclose my idea to anybody otherwise it is in the public domain and could invalidate an application for a patent.Anyway I figure, what the heck, I don't have the money to take on someone who uses my idea without my permission so I decide to explain it on a web page or maybe publish a book about it. So now I write some explanatory text and draw some schematics explaining how this works. This information is now in the public domain, I can not specify how it is used. If a terrorist wants to use it to destroy the world or the government wants to use it to fight crime there is nothing I can do to stop them.If someone copies chunks of my book/website word for word, illustration for illustration then I have a case for violation of copyright.In my book/website I publish a gerber file so you can order your own PCB and build one the same as mine. I might state that this PCB file is for non-comercial use only. This you must follow as the PCB layout file is considered an original artwork.You are a mega rich oligarch who decides to build and sell one of these circuits. All you need to do is produce your own PCB layout and build your circuit. There is nothing I can do because the circuit is in the public domain.So that is the legal point, but then you have the ethical point. If you plan on selling the product for a profit then ethically the right thing to do would be to at least acknowledge my design and adhere to my wishes. If I for example did not want my design used for weapons development, there is a good chance that the bad publicity that you get from going against my wishes could make enough bad feeling to put you out of business.

author: RickBrant
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 11, 2015, 08:23:46 pm
content: Doesn't turning a schematic into a PCB layout count as making a "derivative work"? "Derivative works" include things like translations of text, "porting" of program code from one environment to another or changing it to another programming language; transpositions of music from one key to another or re-arrangements for different instruments; etc. In the US at least the right to make "derivative works" is one of the rights granted by copyright.

author: Tandy
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 11, 2015, 08:30:15 pm
content: It is a bit odd but one is an invention and the other is an artwork.Arranging notes to form music is an artwork, either as sheet music or as a performance.The arrangement of components, or for example the arrangement of chemicals to make a drug is an invention.An invention can not be copyrighted but an artwork can.

author: Richard Crowley
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 11, 2015, 08:57:26 pm
content: Quote from: RickBrant on May 11, 2015, 08:23:46 pmThere are three different things here:1) CIRCUIT - is the interconnection scheme of components to implement some function. You cannot effectively copyright a circuit.2) SCHEMATIC DIAGRAM - is the graphical representation of the circuit. The "artwork" can be copyright protected by the person who drew it.3) PC BOARD LAYOUT - is the physical implementation of the circuit. It is a graphical piece of "artwork" that can be copyright protected.I have never seen any evidence that anybody successfully argued that drawing your own schematic diagram, or creating your own PC layout of a circuit constituted a "derivative work" since the circuit itself if not protected.I believe, however, that a circuit can be patented. That doesn't prevent you from making a circuit for your own personal use. But it does prevent you from making and distributing (whether for profit or for free) to others unless you have a license/agreement from the patent-owner.

author: Sigmoid
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 11, 2015, 08:58:09 pm
content: Quote from: RickBrant on May 11, 2015, 08:23:46 pmThe difference is that the circuit is not a "work", it's a "thing", so copyright doesn't apply to it.It's like if you read a book about building treehouses, and then build a treehouse, then the treehouse is not a derivative work.

author: iampoor
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 12, 2015, 01:10:04 am
content: Okay that makes sense!Thanks Tandy and Richard for the examples. It makes sense. I was pretty certain patents were the only way to "protect" a circuit!

author: JoeO
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 12, 2015, 11:55:47 am
content: iampoor - It would really help if you turned on your country flag.

author: ConKbot
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 12, 2015, 04:56:19 pm
content: Quote from: blueskull on May 12, 2015, 01:18:25 amAs mentioned, it's the schematic diagram it's self, not the contents. For example, if a text book author decides to use a schematic (directly, exactly the same image )and excerpt of text directly from one of his pages, he has legal footing for a copyright lawsuit.

author: iampoor
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 13, 2015, 11:42:30 pm
content: Quote from: blueskull on May 12, 2015, 01:18:25 amHi BoDo you have any experience with how this varies between Chinese and American culture?I just watched Daves videos interview with Rod. Apparently someone took his entire article and text, and "sold" it as a project to Silicon Chip. Probablly explains why he has so many notices! O0Quote from: JoeO on May 12, 2015, 11:55:47 amGood call! Im in the USA. Ill update that!

author: f5r5e5d
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 13, 2015, 11:49:42 pm
content: Quotenot strictly true - legally a patent in the US restricts "make, use, sell" including personal making and use - there is a limited exemption for investigation/experimentation - but you could be sued for using a unlicensed patented invention you made a copy of yourself if it comes to the attention of the patent holder

author: Richard Crowley
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2015, 12:12:04 am
content: Quote from: f5r5e5d on May 13, 2015, 11:49:42 pmNothing prevents you from making your own copy as long as you don't sell it (or even give it away). And as long as you don't use it "in commerce" (i.e. to make a profit). But merely copying something for your own amusement (or education) is not protected as I understand it.Remember that free "legal opinion" may not even be worth what you paid for it. Especially from someone on the internet who you don't know.

author: iampoor
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2015, 12:47:37 am
content: Quote from: Richard Crowley on May 14, 2015, 12:12:04 amI cant imagine any company spending the amount of money that a patent lawsuit costs to go after someone making a single copy for personal use!

author: ConKbot
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2015, 02:09:02 pm
content: Quote from: iampoor on May 14, 2015, 12:47:37 amOh how fast people forget.https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100713/17400810200.shtmldownload a song from a $10 album, and upload it to 2 other people to keep your torrent ratio good? 100k+ lawsuit

author: f5r5e5d
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2015, 03:09:44 pm
content: Quoteif you are open and notoriously using, publicizing your use in youtube videos, forum posts... then the patent holder may feel required to have his lawyer send you a letter, start the process to show that the patent is not abandoned - the Estoppel principle would mean his large licensees could point to your nonpayment of fees - or violation of exclusivity in their deal with the patent holder to stop paying themselvesif you are violating the patent, don't cease when notified, then you are the one likely to get hit with both side lawyer's feesthe law is clear, you can read up on dedicated patent law sites - many engineers will have been to IP law seminars...

author: iampoor
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2015, 06:19:07 pm
content: Quote from: ConKbot on May 14, 2015, 02:09:02 pmI wonder if the whole purpose of these lawsuits was to discourage people from torrenting? Torrenting is a much larger issue compared to people playing with patented circuits...Im sure....Quote from: f5r5e5d on May 14, 2015, 03:09:44 pmInteresting, that's what I was assuming would happen.For the record: I would never build a circuit from a patent for "personal use" or any other reason....not worth it to me, just interesting.

author: Richard Crowley
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2015, 06:35:56 pm
content: Quote from: iampoor on May 14, 2015, 06:19:07 pmOne of the alleged purposes of publishing patents on the public record is to inspire and encourage future development. Of course there are many proprietary things used in industry that are protected as "Trade Secrets", primarily to avoid public disclosure from patent or copyright.