Keysight Scary Letter - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / testgear

author: jjoonathan
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 25, 2019, 02:46:31 pm
content: I just received what appears to be a letter originating from Keysight (via an auction house) demanding that I take a HP 8562A spectrum analyzer off the market on account of intellectual property it contains.What the hell? Is this for real?EDIT: added specific modelEDIT: added letterEDIT: made title less interprativeEDIT: I have been in touch with Keysight. As the cooler heads in this thread guessed, this has nothing to do with Keysight using bogus IP claims to go after the used SA market. It's a one-off SNAFU. Keep calm and ebay on!

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 25, 2019, 02:48:28 pm
content: QuoteWithout actually posting what and from whom you have received it, your question is useless.

author: jjoonathan
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 25, 2019, 02:52:57 pm
content: I may just get to the point of posting the actual letter, but it contains PII that I have to remove.I am really asking if other people have received similar letters, if this is a tactic the community has seen them deploy before (against buyers of old equipment -- afaik that's the extent of the relationship here), or, since their representatives visit this forum, if they would like to comment on the situation.

author: Bud
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 25, 2019, 02:56:52 pm
content: Was it a generic type of equipment?

author: jjoonathan
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 25, 2019, 03:00:11 pm
content: It was an HP8562A spectrum analyzer.

author: Mr. Scram
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 25, 2019, 03:02:13 pm
content: Did you use logos or texts in the ad which may be construed as coming officially from Keysight?

author: jjoonathan
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 25, 2019, 03:03:05 pm
content: I was the customer. I never sold or attempted to sell the SA.EDIT: and if the auction house I purchased it from used copy or logos that (to a lawyer) might be construed as coming directly from Keysight, I most certainly did not construe them that way. Since I sometimes sell old HP equipment (but not, as of yet, the equipment under discussion), I would be interested in learning exactly what they want us to avoid. For instance, is putting "HP" in the listing forbidden? Is putting "HP/Agilent/Keysight" in the listing forbidden?

author: rsjsouza
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 25, 2019, 03:12:57 pm
content: That is indeed odd. I can only speculate, but I wonder if this SpecAn is ITAR controlled and your name is somehow linked to an embargoed country or somehow matches a list of bad actors - these lists exist but are full of flaws. Or this letter is sent to anyone that purchases these equipments from a more established company (i.e., not eBay, for example).

author: jjoonathan
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 25, 2019, 03:18:13 pm
content: I'm a US citizen several generations deep. The nearest foreign cousins are in the Netherlands and, as far as I know, there are no terrorists sharing my last name. I have shipped equipment to Australia and Canada before, but nothing apart from that.As you say, the lists are imperfect, but I don't think this is that.

author: Marco
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 25, 2019, 03:23:38 pm
content: Just reply that unless they can provide some rationale why first sale doctrine doesn't apply they should kindly fuck off.

author: taydin
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 25, 2019, 03:30:33 pm
content: I think the answer to your question is in your question. You said the letter came from an auction house. Most likely the auction house wants this unit to be bought by their customer and wants YOU to retract your offer.

author: jjoonathan
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 25, 2019, 03:33:01 pm
content: The letter is signed by a lawyer from Keysight and CC'd to a keysight address. I don't think it's a spoof.Also, the SA in question has been sitting on my desk for a year. It's not an active listing.EDIT: the CC isn't to a keysight address, it's to a law firm.

author: Marco
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 25, 2019, 03:45:17 pm
content: Maybe they sold off some SA's with government only upgrades, noticed it way late and panicked?

author: Keysight DanielBogdanoff
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 25, 2019, 03:59:29 pm
content: I'm not familiar with this situation, but have worked with Marc before and can confirm he's Keysight. I'd highly encourage you to give him a quick call and figure it out.

author: jjoonathan
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 25, 2019, 04:04:42 pm
content: Will do, thanks.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 25, 2019, 04:09:10 pm
content: Quote from: jjoonathan on January 25, 2019, 03:03:05 pmI think that the term 'taken off the market' means that the equipment must be returned to Keysight. I suspect this piece of equipment was used for something related to the military and/or national security and has to be destroyed for legal reasons. Keysight basically offers to buy it back. I'd give the guy from Keysight a call and see if you can trade it in for something similar.

author: vtwin@cox.net
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 25, 2019, 04:10:11 pm
content: I take it you purchased the item from Outback Trading Company.It sounds like the piece of equipment contained some proprietary software and shouldn't have been consigned to Outback for resale. So they're tracing the equipment forward -- e.g. they probably contacted the person who gave it to outback, who told them "i gave it to outback", outback told them they sold it to you, and now you're getting the letter.I'm not familiar enough with IP law to say whether or not they have a leg to stand on, but my guess is the original purchaser probably had a contractual agreement that the device would be returned or destroyed and not resold.... in which case, an argument could be made that the OP didn't have clear title to the equipment to 'resell' or consign it to Outback for sale. This may have been a complete oversight on part of the OP -- e.g. if an employee acquired the equipment with the restriction, left the company, and the company then unknowing of the restriction liquidated the item.I would offer to give it back to them in exchange for a brand-new spectrum analyzer meeting the specifications of the one you have. It's a win-win for them -- they get their IP back and you get a brand new SA. Far cheaper for them too, in terms of litigation.

author: Qw3rtzuiop
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 25, 2019, 04:16:15 pm
content: We have some rf stuff at work were we signed an end-user certificate. This could be the case here.

author: JDubU
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 25, 2019, 04:25:02 pm
content: Quote from: vtwin@cox.net on January 25, 2019, 04:10:11 pmTake a look at the box ("A replacement for this product is available:...") at the upper right corner of this web page:https://www.keysight.com/en/pd-8562A%3Aepsg%3Apro-pn-8562A/9-khz-22-ghz-spectrum-analyzer?cc=US&lc=eng

author: Mr. Scram
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 25, 2019, 04:27:42 pm
content: If I understand correctly Keysight is trying to hold of a unit OP purchased fair and square from a third party? I don't think they have any legal leverage here. Even if there is some super secret technology in that device, it'd be a matter for the relevant agencies and not Keysight.Did they share what the problem is? I would be hesitant to make any move before they clarify their motivation. Apparently you have some very special equipment there.

author: jjoonathan
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 25, 2019, 04:33:14 pm
content: Ok guys, you're right, I should chill until I know what's going on.

author: tsman
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 25, 2019, 04:45:55 pm
content: Quote from: Mr. Scram on January 25, 2019, 04:27:42 pmIt would depend on if the original seller had the right to sell it. It could be something like this SA was on loan from Keysight and was liquidated at auction by mistake. It is still Keysight's property even though OP bought it.

author: Marco
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 25, 2019, 04:55:02 pm
content: Quote from: Qw3rtzuiop on January 25, 2019, 04:16:15 pmJust curious, does that certificate say you have loaned the object or that you obligate yourself to not sell it on?If it's a loan and you resell it any way the producer might be able to reclaim it depending on the laws in your country (in my country if you buy goods from a non auctioneer second hand goods shop it's yours for instance, where it came from is not your problem). If it's your property and you resell it then the breach of contract is entirely your problem, not the person who bough it.

author: 0culus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 25, 2019, 04:59:28 pm
content: Quote from: JDubU on January 25, 2019, 04:25:02 pmI would take this approach as well. If the unit you have is indeed in need of being traced and potentially destroyed, that's inconveniencing you and your lab (doesn't matter if you're a hobbyist or a professional IMO). They should provide you with the modern replacement free of charge.

author: Mr. Scram
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 25, 2019, 05:00:52 pm
content: Quote from: 0culus on January 25, 2019, 04:59:28 pmDon't forget the super secret special abilities of the device OP now has to live without.