So, I had a run in with someone recently that got me thinking. I was demoing an amp for someone and in the process of asking me 20 questions about the amp, this gentleman stated (after I told him that this amp was not a clone of anything) that all amp circuits are just stolen designs. Jim Marshall stole from Leo Fender, Leo Fender stole from Westinghouse, etc. I know most of the history on this, and I have heard that argument articulated here and on other forums. But this got me thinking...
When I was in engineering school, we studied a lot of physics. In EVERY class, one of the themes that came up often was that we "stand on the shoulders of giants." I took this to mean that scientists, engineers, and even artists do not exist and practice their craft in a vacuum. Everyone of them was influenced by the last generation's giants. Maxwell's Equations and Newton's ideas on gravity and calculus did not appear out of nowhere. These men were influenced by their teachers as well as current and former knowledge and research.
Now, a guitar amplifiers isn't remotely on the same level as the Law of Gravity, Calculus, or Maxwell's Equations, but the principle still applies... an inventor/scientist/engineer takes stock of current knowledge and technology, applies a lot of elbow grease, and with a lot of hard work (and luck), out pops something new. Now this new "thing" might appear to cross a huge technology gap, or it might be one of the small, incremental improvements that is far more common, or it may be a new and novel way of doing the same thing. But according to today's tribal knowledge among tube amplifier enthusiasts and builders, this is merely theft... at least that is what I seem to be hearing from some in this crowd. "It's all been done before" they say. I hear this about guitar-based music as well "There's only so many ways you can put 4 chords together" is a common refrain.
So here is my question... When is this amp building business we love to engage in merely "theft" and when are we "standing on the shoulders of giants"?
-Me
Theft?
Moderators: pompeiisneaks, Colossal
Theft?
Ryan Brown
Brown Amplification LLC
Brown Amplification LLC
Should be moved but first-
Being a philosophical question in nature this Topic probably belongs in the Garage Talk section. However I'll still toss in my 2 peso's-
The favourable to cloning answering of this question could also serve to indemnify all the pirates of the world in places like China... After all, one mans' amp is another mans' operating system... If were not going to have an enforceable patent system then all bets should be off and whatever can be copied should be legal. If were going to enforce the patent laws and copyright privileges then ban products from copy cat nations. Suddenly American entrepreneurs and design engineers would be back in demand- Here!
In allowing and in some instances aiding in the wholesale theft of American intellectual property and the hacking of systems from abroad, the enforcers have lost all credibility and those that keep them in power, the voters, lose their claim to ownership.
Perhaps Alexander Dumble wasn't such a jerk in the potting of nearly the entire amp circuit, after all. Maybe that's why he no longer produces amps; or is he dead now?? Don't know but I do know he quit long before time.
As for the browser of amps: The response you got regarding intellectual theft from the peruser, was more likely an unconscious response designed to justify the purchase of nothing while keeping the dream alive, justifiably so in his mind.
silverfox.
The favourable to cloning answering of this question could also serve to indemnify all the pirates of the world in places like China... After all, one mans' amp is another mans' operating system... If were not going to have an enforceable patent system then all bets should be off and whatever can be copied should be legal. If were going to enforce the patent laws and copyright privileges then ban products from copy cat nations. Suddenly American entrepreneurs and design engineers would be back in demand- Here!
In allowing and in some instances aiding in the wholesale theft of American intellectual property and the hacking of systems from abroad, the enforcers have lost all credibility and those that keep them in power, the voters, lose their claim to ownership.
Perhaps Alexander Dumble wasn't such a jerk in the potting of nearly the entire amp circuit, after all. Maybe that's why he no longer produces amps; or is he dead now?? Don't know but I do know he quit long before time.
As for the browser of amps: The response you got regarding intellectual theft from the peruser, was more likely an unconscious response designed to justify the purchase of nothing while keeping the dream alive, justifiably so in his mind.
silverfox.
-
Reeltarded
- Posts: 9960
- Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2009 4:38 am
- Location: GA USA
Re: Theft?
Standing on the shoulders of giants just stipulates all proven things before you.
Theft and a copy (or a clone) are two different things. Theft might be as simple as faking another person's work and claiming it's their's. It's a wide grey stripe.
Theft starts at counterfeit and thereabouts...
Theft and a copy (or a clone) are two different things. Theft might be as simple as faking another person's work and claiming it's their's. It's a wide grey stripe.
Theft starts at counterfeit and thereabouts...
Signatures have a 255 character limit that I could abuse, but I am not Cecil B. DeMille.
Re: Theft?
There aren't all that many ways to connect tubes together and have them make sound. So all amps are derivative in that regard. There are subtle differences in tone shaping that don't really constitute new art (despite what Mr. Pittman may have been able to convince the Patent authorities of). If you mislead people, that is wrong. If you stand on the shoulders of Leo Fender, or especially Alan Blumlein, you are just following along.
There was a time when vacuum tube electronics was state of the art and Patent holders would defend their intellectual property vigorously. Not now. I can think of only only one modern tube technology with defensible interests: Advanced Fusion Systems (my neighbor, by the way). I think he's using the Edison Effect as a defense against EMP.
There was a time when vacuum tube electronics was state of the art and Patent holders would defend their intellectual property vigorously. Not now. I can think of only only one modern tube technology with defensible interests: Advanced Fusion Systems (my neighbor, by the way). I think he's using the Edison Effect as a defense against EMP.
Re: Theft?
- and most of the "classical" designs form Marshall, Fender, Selmer etc etc are more or less copies out of the old RCA tube manual....
Then came Williamson, Baxandall, and so on and so on....
I find it hard to believe that anything tube wise can be patented at all, these days, but then I don't understand how quite a lot of the uS patents can pass at all......
EDIT: As for gooping stuff like Dumble does, I can see that a manufacturer wants to protect his combination of component values, but according to average legislation, this is not applicable to patent. Copy right, yes, but not patent...
Then came Williamson, Baxandall, and so on and so on....
I find it hard to believe that anything tube wise can be patented at all, these days, but then I don't understand how quite a lot of the uS patents can pass at all......
EDIT: As for gooping stuff like Dumble does, I can see that a manufacturer wants to protect his combination of component values, but according to average legislation, this is not applicable to patent. Copy right, yes, but not patent...
Re: Theft?
Messy boogers have special brand new tube technology!
Tube junkie that aspires to become a tri-state bidirectional buss driver.
Re: Theft?
Is this the "modern" SS tubes??
Re: Theft?
Layout can be copywrite. Style and name can be trademarked. Component values and circuit can't be protected, despite many "approved" patents that demonstrate otherwise (with the theory of approval until challenged). So many BS patents.
-
RockinRocket
- Posts: 634
- Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2011 5:23 am
Re: Theft?
Let me see the schematic of your Haymaker 50 amplifier and I will show you what is "theft" , "standing on the shoulders of giants", or something new.. But the something new is just going to be common circuits from yester year with slight variations in component values in a different configuration.
-
stretch2011
- Posts: 501
- Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2014 2:53 am
- Location: ohio
- Contact:
Re: Theft?
I agree with everyone else.
No matter how you look at triangle, it will always have 3 sides. Never 2, never 4, but 3. We can paint it every color of the rainbow, but it will always be a triangle with 3 sides.
No matter how you look at triangle, it will always have 3 sides. Never 2, never 4, but 3. We can paint it every color of the rainbow, but it will always be a triangle with 3 sides.
Re: Theft?
Triangle Amps. TM. All rights reserved.
And Furthermore
Upon further consideration and also of the related posts: I believe anything older than 7 years is or should be in the public domain anyway. I know a patent can be extended for an additional 7 years but for sure that doesn't apply to nearly all the tube amp circuits out there now. As a point of law that would make most any tube amp design fair game for cloning.
In regards to patenting electronic circuits: The wind-shield wiper delay circuit, for example, was originally conceived by Robert Kearns and patented. Ford, GM and Chrysler infringed on the patent. However, the patent was upheld and damages awarded in the Chrysler case based on the fact, Kearns argued that his invention was a "novel and non-obvious combination of parts."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Kearns
silverfox
In regards to patenting electronic circuits: The wind-shield wiper delay circuit, for example, was originally conceived by Robert Kearns and patented. Ford, GM and Chrysler infringed on the patent. However, the patent was upheld and damages awarded in the Chrysler case based on the fact, Kearns argued that his invention was a "novel and non-obvious combination of parts."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Kearns
silverfox
Re: Theft?
The lawsuit destroyed his life though.
Tube junkie that aspires to become a tri-state bidirectional buss driver.
Re: Theft?
Marconi. Tesla. Supreme Court. Discuss.
Boy you hit on something there
TUBEDUDE The lawsuit destroyed his life though.
I don't know the details but, the fastest and most sure way to really, and I mean really understand civics and how things work is to: Represent yourself in court on a case that has legitimate merit, against government or big business. It's kinda like the sewer version of the Visable V8.
Why it takes so long to receive a fair hearing in a court matter is in one sense impossible to understand and yet, once you partake of the matter, you understand it all. Quite frankly I think if he tried the same legal action pro se today he wouldn't have a snowballs chance in Hell in getting past the 6 month mark. Not counting the summary dismissals at the various appellate levels. Of course there are exceptions to the general rule and they have everything to do with things like: color, gender, orientation, you get my drift.
silverfox.
I don't know the details but, the fastest and most sure way to really, and I mean really understand civics and how things work is to: Represent yourself in court on a case that has legitimate merit, against government or big business. It's kinda like the sewer version of the Visable V8.
Why it takes so long to receive a fair hearing in a court matter is in one sense impossible to understand and yet, once you partake of the matter, you understand it all. Quite frankly I think if he tried the same legal action pro se today he wouldn't have a snowballs chance in Hell in getting past the 6 month mark. Not counting the summary dismissals at the various appellate levels. Of course there are exceptions to the general rule and they have everything to do with things like: color, gender, orientation, you get my drift.
silverfox.