Advice: Altium removed our Board name and use it in their videos - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: robertferanec
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2015, 08:44:06 am
content: Hello,Altium Company intentionally removed our company name and project website from ouriMX6 Rex open source projectand used it in theirAltium LIVE DRILL DRAWINGvideo, without asking us anything.What would you do? Is not violation ofCreative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License? Thank you for your advice. - RobertPicture: On the TOP, there is the original silkscreen from iMX6 Rex module. On the BOTTOM, it's a screenshot from Altium Live Drill Drawing video.Screenshot of the Altium website:

author: Mechanical Menace
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2015, 08:59:11 am
content: Quote from: blueskull on April 23, 2015, 08:52:17 am+1. Always try the friendly approach first. The worse that can happen is an uppity response.

author: robertferanec
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2015, 09:00:10 am
content: I regularly speak to Altium. The thing is, two days ago I spoke to them and I pointed this problem out (it's not the first time, they used our project in their videos without referring to it, but removing our company name from the silkscreen, that really is too much). I am not sure when exactly this new video appeared, but according toAltium Facebookit was yeasterday.

author: ElektroQuark
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 23, 2015, 09:31:43 am
content: Send them an invoice.

author: HighVoltage
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2015, 10:01:01 am
content: It seems like, you are not in the USA.Otherwise your attorneys would have filed a lawsuit already.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 23, 2015, 10:14:50 am
content: LegallyBut it is being a bit duchebaggery. There is no real reason for them to not give attribution here and keep the silkscreen if they are using someone else's board file.In fact it's good community relations to promote projects that are using Altium.

author: Ice-Tea
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2015, 10:19:55 am
content: Well, seems in bad taste at least...

author: robertferanec
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2015, 10:28:18 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on April 23, 2015, 10:14:50 amI keep asking exactly the same question.

author: robertferanec
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2015, 10:30:53 am
content: Quote from: HighVoltage on April 23, 2015, 10:01:01 amWe are also located in the US. The thing is, I would rather cooperate with them.

author: Wilksey
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2015, 10:42:27 am
content: Ooh, the nasty bastards!Tip #1 to a good business model: Do not rip off your customers!To blatantly rip off your design and remove your branding is totally unacceptable, open source or not, to not ask if they could do so or even put a credit to you somewhere is totally unacceptable, especially for a company such as Altium.(I must admit, I thought you worked for Altium with the level of detail and knowledge that you include in your most excellent videos!)I would talk to them first, ask them to pull the video and remake it with your name retained, if they refuse, I don't know what you have in your country, here in the UK we have a "small claims court" which are supposed to be for things such as this, but you don't always win!

author: nitro2k01
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2015, 10:46:38 am
content: I wonder if this might be done, not out of malice, but due to an overly cautious lawyer being concerned about diluting your trademark under the Lanham Act. Also, be wary of any contracts you may have signed with Altium that would give them the explicit right to do this, for example if you've shared this schematic on their site, assuming they have such a service for users. Again, I would echo what people have said. Talk to them and try to sort it out in a friendly manner first.

author: Rasz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2015, 10:57:01 am
content: Quote from: HighVoltage on April 23, 2015, 10:01:01 amGermany is a good place to sue when open source license gets violated, Judges there like to do things like prevent imports to whole EU as a countermeasure, makes companies 'do the right thing' quick.

author: robzy
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2015, 11:02:06 am
content: Unfortunately I think that Altium are legally in the right (although morally in the wrong).For example - if Dave were to take a PCB out of a commercial device, he is allowed to show it in a video. He's even allowed to cover up any branding and show it in the video.He's allowed to delayer the PCBs and post high quality photos on the EEVBlog website if he so wants.All without saying where he actually got the PCB from.Feel free to correct me if I'm mistaken.Rob.

author: Mechanical Menace
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2015, 11:08:03 am
content: Quote from: robzy on April 23, 2015, 11:02:06 amThey haven't taken a product and blanked out the brand name, they've taken a copyrighted design specifically licensed for none commercial use by attribution to the copyright owners and passed it off as their own for commercial gain.

author: robertferanec
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2015, 11:10:18 am
content: Quote from: Wilksey on April 23, 2015, 10:42:27 amI have never worked for Altium. I am very happy you like the videos - it's good to hear something positive today

author: kaz911
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2015, 11:13:10 am
content: Well if Altium can "pirate designs and use them commercially" - can't we just do the same? An Altium "Download license" seems very appealing *G*

author: mcinque
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 23, 2015, 11:14:16 am
content: Quote from: robzy on April 23, 2015, 11:02:06 amIn one word: NO.It's not like teadowns ok picture galleries, not even close for me.Disgusted.

author: cyr
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2015, 11:25:26 am
content: Quote from: robzy on April 23, 2015, 11:02:06 amI am absolutely not a lawyer, but there is a big difference between taking photos of an object and making use of design files that are covered by copyright...

author: MatthewEveritt
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 23, 2015, 11:30:44 am
content: Quote from: robzy on April 23, 2015, 11:02:06 amThere's a world of difference between a piece of hardware (generally) sold with no well defined license and a design with a specific Attribution-NonCommercial license.Arguably a company would be well within their rights to issue Dave a DMCA takedown if he made a video with that much detail, same as if he reverse engineered it and posted design files, or sold them to a shady manufacturer. They don't bother because he doesn't reveal that much of the design, his use of the material is clearly not intended to infringe copyright and his videos are good exposure for their products.If Altium started building and selling robertferanec's design without his branding there is no possible question that they would be violating the license. Why would using the design in a non-hardware context be any different? You could argue that the video is non-commercial, but you can't argue that they didn't modify the design (by removing the branding) and failed to provide attribution. An dickish violation of the license.

author: JuKu
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2015, 11:46:47 am
content: The video is done to promote sales, clearly commercial.Really dumb move, causing a lot of badwill to the company. Instead, keep the logo and ask permission; any company would be happy for the publicity, and the image of Altium would be supporting their customers, instead of stealing from them.

author: Mechanical Menace
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2015, 11:52:29 am
content: Quote from: MatthewEveritt on April 23, 2015, 11:30:44 amErm, fair useQuoteAgain that depends. A lot of it on the purpose of the reversing and the details released, a lot of it on which jurisdiction the site hosting the files operates under and the jurisdiction of those reversing the product.In the UK I can reverse engineer something for personal use, but I can't even publish specs. Our idea of fair use (fair dealing) is also much less liberal than the US's.In the US the persons involved with reversing something and producing the specs can't be involved with the reimplementation, but as long as it is for interoperability reasons that's about the only problem.In some parts of Europe you can do both the reversing and reimplementation and it still be counted as a "clean room" reverse engineering project.That doesn't get around any patent issues, but only stupid patent laws allow software patents and I think almost every jurisdiction forces holders of a patentvitalto a standard to license them at reasonable rates or lose the patent.

author: adam1213
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2015, 12:09:09 pm
content: Quote from: Mechanical Menace on April 23, 2015, 11:52:29 amIndeed fair use for Australia -http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/ca1968133/s41.html

author: Rufus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2015, 12:09:18 pm
content: What a pile of drivel this thread is.Did they remove anything or just turn off display of text on silkscreen layers to avoid the distraction of information completely irrelevant to the aim of their video?If I get some of these PCBs made without silksceen to save cost are you going to sue me for breaking licensing conditions or issue DMCA takedown notices if I post a picture of one on the web?Quote from: robertferanec on April 23, 2015, 08:44:06 amNothing at all because coming across as a whiny butt hurt fool would do far more damage to my project than lack of obvious attribution on some obscure Altium video about drill drawings.

author: mamalala
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 23, 2015, 12:20:25 pm
content: Quote from: Rufus on April 23, 2015, 12:09:18 pmDoes that work the other way around as well in your world? For example, if i take Altium Designer, remove the strings referring to Altium (or just disable printing them), and then hand out the resulting package as a freebie for some obscure "How to layout a PCB" course?Greetings,Chris

author: robertferanec
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2015, 12:27:53 pm
content: Quote from: Rufus on April 23, 2015, 12:09:18 pmI was quiet for some time and did nothing. They have used the project files in number of their other videos, posts, seminars .... without referring to the project. But today, it really was too much.

author: GK
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2015, 12:41:02 pm
content: But why would they even need to pinch someone else's design from the web? You'd think that as a producer of a PCB design suite they'd have their own library of designs at hand or would have someone handy who could knock up a quick layout with a bunch of different footprints.

author: Rasz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2015, 12:45:48 pm
content: Quote from: GK on April 23, 2015, 12:41:02 pmThey had, but they laid off Dave

author: RoTTe
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2015, 01:25:22 pm
content: The curious thing is they said: "Image credit: iMX6 Rex Design by Robert Feranec" on some places, and left the original file names but remove the silkscreen.Good luck with this and great work with Martin/iMX6Rex, Robert.

author: robertferanec
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2015, 01:37:06 pm
content: Quote from: RoTTe on April 23, 2015, 01:25:22 pmThank you. This is how it looked a few days ago when we saved the page for our reference. This is how it looks now:New Productivity Features to Take Advantage of in Altium Designer 15.1Maybe ... something is happening?

author: robzy
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2015, 02:34:26 pm
content: Quote from: Mechanical Menace on April 23, 2015, 11:08:03 amThey have taken a product and blanked out the brand name. Thats exactly what they did.And if Dave were to follow the hypothetical in my first post, then he would be taking a copyrighted design and using it for commercial gain. In fact, he wouldn't even have the it licensed to him under CC terms.So yeah, morally horrible, and as a free-software advocate it has lowered my respect for Altium, but I'm not entirely convinced it is illegal.That being said, it looks that some attribution has started to be made, which is great. I hope that Altium do more.Rob.

author: Wilksey
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2015, 04:38:36 pm
content: Maybe they have read this blog and decided it might be best to credit your work!As I said before it is bang out of order for them not to even mention to you that they were using it, manners cost nothing and take no time to use!That i.MX6 routing is insane! Massive respect to you for that! You can at least now be proud that they chose your files to showcase that they have credited you, something for the C.V!Bit of a difference from you using Altium's stuff to them using your stuff when it comes to employment!The most positive thing to take from it, regardless of them crediting you or not, is that it's your designs that they chose to use in their product showcase!

author: Boondock Journeyman
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: April 23, 2015, 06:51:11 pm
content: Robert,I feel your pain. I am a US IP attorney (my PTO no. is in the 35,000 block for all you old timer's in the game).As usual, I need to say that I am not acting as your attorney or agent for all the usual reasons. I can take your question on as an academic or hypothetical problem.Here is the bottom line, in the US, you get out of IP exactly what you put into IP. Taking an internet "standard agreement" and slapping it on your work will give you exactly nothing in return. It is a moral standard and has not been ruled on by the vast majority of courts having competent jurisdiction on a country by country and (at least in the US) state by state basis. That's right, every US state has its own TM law. It is a total circus globally. The internet "standards" are not legal documents but rather moral guidelines.So here is how you win:First, forget about the courts. How will you prove damages? Have you got at least $100K to have all the relevant documents reviewed, including the rules for the offender's forums? I have fought dozens of TM cases. The highest damage award was $5K on a product selling $30B/Y. The real meat of the cases are the injunctions or coexistence agreements (promises not to mess around again). A very expensive way to get back to reasonable conduct. It also gets a lot of corporate counsel fired for wasting resources.Inside a company, the people who handle EXISTING accounts are at the top of the pile. Those that troll around for new customers are somewhere near the bottom. People running internet campaigns, well - here is the brutal and unpopular truth, most are interns or what our Chairman used to call "dead enders". They are almost invisible to management.So here is how people used to beat my company when we screwed up like this - have EXISTING customers ask their account reps what the story is. Have them end the call (way more effective than an email) with this question: "Is this going to happen to me?"If even a few EXISTING customers do this, I assure you, bells will start ringing. Management will look five or ten levels down and find out who the hell did this. In the end, it might even get the company to make some long term changes.I know, sounds wimpy. But I know from years as a VP of IP that EXISTING account managers could make my phone hop all over my desk. Complaints of any type, or even nice questions from non-existing customers were not even visible.Give it a try. Good luck. Let me know what happens.-----Nitro - Your Lanham Act idea confuses me. I have read at least 100 D.Ct. cases on TM. Is there a big hole in my knowledge? Please let me know if you have ever seen a bad actor under TM law make this argument in front of a judge. I think they would be spending the weekend in jail for contempt. I once did one of these contempt weekends myself. Attorneys are wary of inverting a statue to allow the bad actor to use a protective statute to shield them from their bad acts on the protected class. Help me out if I am missing the point. As a real live attorney, I mean it. If I am wrong, I need to know.

author: MatthewEveritt
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 23, 2015, 09:49:14 pm
content: Quote from: Mechanical Menace on April 23, 2015, 11:52:29 amThat's the point really. If someone was reveling the full details of the design for the purpose of remanufacture then there's nothing fair about it, throw the book at them.Fair use is an important concept, because under the layers of legalese the whole point of copyright etc is to protect fairness (or to line people's pockets, depending how clinical you are) . It goes both ways - use an open source design in your video, but be fair, give them the attribution they asked for.

author: timofonic
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2015, 09:56:04 pm
content: Quote from: robertferanec on April 23, 2015, 10:30:53 amSwitch to KiCad if you can and help the project.They are getting nastier, don't deserve to be used. Overpriced software, KiCad would be as good as Altiim with only 500K USD, that's what a few electronics companies spend on EDA in at least a year.

author: mamalala
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 23, 2015, 10:52:02 pm
content: Quote from: Boondock Journeyman on April 23, 2015, 06:51:11 pmAre you serious? I mean, what you are saying is basically "If you use the terms of an agreement that is availbale to look up on the net, it is worth nothing".The person obviously has attached a license to his work. It just happens to be one that many others use as well.Ahh, wait, i know. You want every license agreement to be individual. Preferably with you involved in drafting it, right? I mean, how else could we possibly keep all those IP lawyers alive, right?Greetings,Chris

author: robzy
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 24, 2015, 01:43:52 am
content: Quote from: Boondock Journeyman on April 23, 2015, 06:51:11 pm[citation needed]Rob.

author: robertferanec
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 24, 2015, 06:28:31 am
content: Thank you for all your support. I am talking to Altium now. They apologized, removed the video and promised to record a new video which will include the silkscreen.To be fair, usually Altium asked me for my permission to use the iMX6 Rex data, but they really should not remove our company information and project website from it. I only hope, they don't use it in their paid trainings.It is sad, that it had to go so far to be able to get their attention to speak seriously about this problem.

author: SteveyG
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 24, 2015, 08:50:29 am
content: Quote from: Boondock Journeyman on April 23, 2015, 06:51:11 pm

author: LabSpokane
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 24, 2015, 09:43:32 am
content: Quote from: mamalala on April 23, 2015, 10:52:02 pmHe's saying there is very little case law that demonstrates the enforceability of these licensing agreements. These "licensing" agreements are like "roll-your-LLCs." Good luck if you ever are sued, because they usually aren't worth much if anything to the courts.The truth may hurt, but there's no point in shooting the messenger.

author: T3sl4co1l
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 24, 2015, 02:55:50 pm
content: Quote from: LabSpokane on April 24, 2015, 09:43:32 amAll I find on Google is companies like "Roll Your Own Tobacco, LLC"

author: robertferanec
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 24, 2015, 03:04:51 pm
content: Just to keep you updated, today, I received a call from Altium Marketing department. After the call, I feel much better.As I understood, a new engineer removed the silkscreen, simply because it didn't look good at the video. Dave and Ben from Altium blame themselves for not noticing that, and they apologized to me (several times) and I believe, they really mean that. I appreciate it a lot guys, and I accept your apology.I need to be honest, I know it's not really Dave's and Ben's fault. I would be very surprised if they knew how the original silkscreen looks, so there was not really a big chance to notice, that the silkscreen was modified in the pre-recorded video. Dave also explained, that the engineer was not properly instructed about the conditions when and how the iMX6 Rex design files can be used and that the name should not be removed from it.To close this topic, Altium re-confirmed, they are going to make a new video with the original silkscreen and will re-post it in the next couple of days.I am very happy. Everything is now ok and all these troubles actually might open a way for better communication and maybe even closer cooperation.Expect our boards popping up on Altium pages also in the future. Thank you very much everyone. You really helped to move the things!

author: Mechanical Menace
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 24, 2015, 03:31:54 pm
content: Glad to hear things worked out well and that the nice approach actually works. Thanks for keeping us all up to date.

author: Rufus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 24, 2015, 03:53:19 pm
content: NOTE: This message has been deleted by the forum moderator Simon for being against the forum rules and/or at the discretion of the moderator as being in the best interests of the forum community and the nature of the thread.If you believe this to be in error, please contact the moderator involved.An optional additional explanation is:

author: LabSpokane
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 24, 2015, 06:57:58 pm
content: Quote from: T3sl4co1l on April 24, 2015, 02:55:50 pmD'oh! Damned autocorrect!!

author: robzy
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 25, 2015, 03:10:20 am
content: Quote from: robertferanec on April 24, 2015, 03:04:51 pmThat's fantastic news, I'm glad to hear it.Rob.

author: donotdespisethesnake
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 29, 2015, 08:00:16 pm
content: Quote from: robertferanec on April 23, 2015, 08:44:06 amTwo things leap out:1. Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial is not an Open Source license.http://www.oshwa.org/2014/05/21/cc-oshw/So either you need to change your license or you should not call it Open Source.2. The CC licenses are based on Copyright law, which generally applies to "creative" works. "Utility" works are generally excluded. Copyright does not apply to PCBs, and you can't make it apply by claiming it. Copyright laws simply don't work like that.So legally, Altium are perfectly within their rights. Even if copyright did apply, fair use is a reasonable exception.Unfortunately, the term "Open Source" is now widely abused with non-open licenses. And even worse, many people try to slap on a Creative Commons license to *everything*, regardless of whether it is suitable, and not only using licenses that are more restrictive than Open Source,they are claiming to be more restrictive than existing legal rights!