Welcome to Laser Pointer Forums - discuss green laser pointers, blue laser pointers, and all types of lasers



Laser Pointer Store

Help with classification of laser parts

Joined
May 4, 2009
Messages
5,462
Likes
551
Points
0
I would like some input from every one concerned for classification of laser parts that we would like to see put on a list so that others can see what is and what isn't allowed to be copied by members and made available for sale HERE.

this is to be a discussion to try and come up with a list of items, and as an example:

(A bought host is not something that would be designed by any one here and is available to any one for a price so I think they should be left off the list of things that would not be allowed to copy and sell HERE)

(The only exception to that would be if there was some mortification to said host)

(A custom focus adapted designed by any one person should be on a list of thing not allowed to be made and sold by any one other than the creator of it)

Please fell free to comment and make suggestions :thanks:
 

Mrcrouse

New member
Joined
Jul 10, 2009
Messages
1,477
Likes
142
Points
0
I would put up there that basically any laser component that exhibits some sort of designing creativity. It should be something that is fairly easy to distinguish. Also it may be important to note that if any member is unsure, then to contact the member who is currently making the custom parts.

I'd also like to say things like polishing or painting are also free game in my opinion.

Any unique laser related tools should be restricted.

Any unique circuits such as drivers should be restricted.

These restrictions are obviously for the creator to decide. If you want your circuit diagram to be available to everyone then that is your decision. :beer:
 
Last edited:

lasersbee

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 20, 2008
Messages
17,462
Likes
1,559
Points
113
Doing some legal research in the past months I found
that an original "work" or "design" is automatically
copyrighted to the original developer/artist/designer
when it is made public.

If you wish to take legal action against any copyright
infringement then you would first need to Register your
copyright with the Copyright Office to show that you are
the owner in court.

This is equally legal and binding in the USA and Canada.

Copyrights - Canadian Intellectual Property Office


Jerry

You can contact us at any time on our Website: J.BAUER Electronics
 
Last edited:

Mrcrouse

New member
Joined
Jul 10, 2009
Messages
1,477
Likes
142
Points
0
You are right about things being automatically copyrighted, but I am pretty sure that manufactured goods do not fall under such a category.
 

Onryo

New member
Joined
Aug 3, 2012
Messages
74
Likes
9
Points
0
Yup, I tried to explain it a little better here with what I call the MSL (My Shit Licence). licences on the forums when somebody asked said "how about if two people start selling normal C6 heatsinks.

Quite simple:

I was waiting for that
It would have to be a so called "intellectual" work. Be it creative in art and design or innovative so that others do not know the workings.

Sure people can nitpick to death but we already know the answer to something like a plan old C6 heatsink. Like I said "If you got to reverse engineer it or need to buy a physical product to make your own copy you know for sure you are breaking this" These items are MSL by default unless the innovator says it is not.
Who can enforce this? Since laser hosts, drivers and the such are a niche item I can not think of a better place then LPF and PL. Heck we even have Chinese secretaries trying to get on the forums and sell stuff to us. Banning somebody from the forums (and putting them on a hall of shame page) who is dependent on selling these niche items could be devastating.

I proposed 2 kinds of licences for "open source" projects. This would put a end to squabling if somebody desides to make something like a open source boost.
- WTFPL
- GLPFL

And one for things like the LaserBee, X-boost etc.
- MSL

Bummer this will prolly never be enforced here. As you know I am an Open Source kind of guy but I have also made it clear that I fully respect the fact that people have the right/need to make money for *their* work if they want.


Doing some legal research in the past months I found
that an original "work" or "design" is automatically
copyrighted to the original developer/artist/designer
when it is made public.

If you wish to take legal action against any copyright
infringement then you would first need to Register your
copyright with the Copyright Office to show that you are
the owner in court.

This is equally legal and binding in the USA and Canada.

Copyrights - Canadian Intellectual Property Office


Jerry

You can contact us at any time on our Website: J.BAUER Electronics
 

Trevor

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 17, 2009
Messages
4,513
Likes
548
Points
113
With heatsinks, it's hardly work the trouble to copyright a design. Even if the lifetime revenue of a particular design is over $1,000 - it's still not really worth it.

For a circuit, the only part of it that is copyrighted is the circuit layout itself, which under currently law is treated as if it were a work of art. The electrical function cannot be copyrighted. If the electrical function is innovative enough, it can be patented in order to have actual legal protection. However, no circuit ever built by, sold by, or demonstrated by an LPF member has ever been innovative enough to have a patent awarded to it.

For example, someone would be infringing on MarioMaster's copyright if they were to copy the circuit layout of the Alpha and sell them. However, someone could note the components and lay out the circuit differently and it would be legal to produce, because they are not infringing upon the copyright and there is no patent because the circuit was not innovative.

With that in mind, it's obviously impossible and impractical to try to legally enforce any kind of IP law in what we do here.

One thing we do need to watch out for when making decisions regarding this is where to draw the line. I demonstrated a prototype LPM a while back that was based on a 32-bit ARM microcontroller. Are 32-bit ARM microcontrollers my domain now? Is anyone else on the forum allowed to create works that use 32-bit ARM microcontrollers? If I were unreasonable, would I be able to have someone shunned because they used the same family of microcontroller that I did?

Regarding heatsinks, if it just fills space in a host then it's not really novel and shouldn't be protected. There's no creative flair to it. But if it is novel, sure - protect it.

But then what happens in the case when someone "infringes?"

Are they banned?

Are they put on the naughty list?

Are they barred from selling?

Who decides whether an offense was committed?

Who decides what the punishment will be? The member who thinks their work has been infringed upon will want to throw the "offending" member under the bus. The "offending" member will want to defend themselves and present an argument for why their work did not infringe.

Does any of this sound familiar? Does anyone remember ban polls?

There's a lot of subjective grey area here, and I think a policy of informal protection of works might end up being more divisive than helpful in the long run. I'd be interested to see what a mod has to say about a system like this.

Our current system is imperfect. A system to protect the work of members here would also be imperfect.

What it comes down to is which system we believe to be less imperfect.

Trevor
 

Flaminpyro

New member
Joined
May 4, 2009
Messages
5,462
Likes
551
Points
0
I agree with heat sinks are just filling a space inside a host and really should not be considered unless they are a
part of the outside also that people see all the time something like this for instance>


I think it must be an original design and be able to be seen not something that is inside of a host that you can not see.

I also don't think commercial made host fall into the category of original but something like the Kryton dose and it
should be protected from unauthorized copying.

Same with my HYDRA focus adapters, I thought of them and so I should be the only one making them for sale here.

I do think with a few common sense rules we could stop any future disputes and drama and that is a good thing :)

Merry Christmas :san:
 

Garoq

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 27, 2010
Messages
1,455
Likes
250
Points
83
This is tough to define. Clearly, most people in this hobby do not own any patents protecting their work (though SL has applied for a design patent on the colored heat sinks and focusing rings). I agree with FP that most non-patented internal components should be open source and that only custom external design elements should be "proprietary". But how you differentiate the details precisely is difficult. The best advice I can can offer is to try and add something to your builds that makes them unique, and ask permission in advance if you want to use someone else's design...and give them credit for it.
 

Meatball

New member
Joined
Feb 1, 2008
Messages
2,989
Likes
172
Points
0
Oh dear, I hope this doesn't make things all complicated and whatnot. I mean, for most of us, this is just a hobby, not a business.

Now would we have similar rule for a patent? For instance, could I manufacture a "copy" of a diode press (like Flaminpyro's) and use it for myself? (I wouldn't even if I could Jeff)

This really only ought to apply to those who are selling things with the intent of profiting. I'm an open source guy myself, and am never impressed if a good idea can only benefit those who can pay for it.

On the other hand, intellectual "protection" is another thing. But, If its a turned piece of metal that juts out from a laser host and looks like a CO2 CNC telescope like that one above, its not something I would consider so "unique". Anyone with a lathe could end up producing the same design all too easily without intention.

I would think circuits and codes need protection before we try and protect a flashlight that someone bought and emptied. It does not seem consistent to me.

Are we going to need an LPF patent officer now? Will they simply ban people for this stuff? What would good and worthwhile enforcement look like?
 
Last edited:

Atomicrox

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 22, 2011
Messages
2,431
Likes
321
Points
83
I never sold anything here and have no plans to do so but...

Honestly?
It'd probably be too complicated, too subjective and might even drive prices up on an already expensive hobby.
I've never been keen on the whole intelectual property thing but if a member feels his work is worth the trouble he should persue the legal means to protect it. Or never make it public in the first place.

Flame away...
 




Top