mat (04/16/83)
A few months ago I auditioned a Carver Sonic Hologram unit at home. At the end of the user's manual, there was a paragraph which went something like this: This unit contains patented Sonic Hologram circuitry. You may not use this unit to make recordings for sale or broadcast. You may, however, make a few recordings to play in your car or show your friends. Hmm. That last sentence sounds like a concession to ``fair use'' as used in copyright law. Comments? Mark Terribile -!hou5e!mat (reluctantly dubbed Duke of deNet)
leichter (04/19/83)
Re: Use of Sonic Hologram circuitry. Patent and copyright law are unrelated. There is no "fair use" provision as such in patent law. As a comparison of the two: Copyright law prevents you from making copies even for your own use. Patent law generally prevents you from SELLING a device that uses the patent; you can make one for your own use - in fact, the patent office will provide you with a copy of the patent with the plans. There is no way that copyright protection could be claimed for the output of the Carver device. Copyright protection applies to unique products of creativ- ity (human). I very much doubt that patent law has anything to say about the use of something made with a patented device; if it did, anything made with a patented printing press, say, would be protected - and damn near every device around has patented parts. Consider the implications of such a point of view on the use of copying machines... Carver could sell you the device using a contract that said you couldn't use it for certain kinds of things. However, putting the restriction in an instruction book that you don't see until after you buy the thing would not be a valid contract by any stretch of the imagination. Once again, I think they are trying to scare you into not doing something that (a) they don't want you to do; and (b) can't prevent you from doing. However, just to be safe, I'd check with a lawyer before using the device for any COMMERCIAL purpose. -- Jerry decvax!yale-comix!leichter leichter@yale
henry (04/28/83)
Jerry Leichter's comments on patent law are not, I think, entirely accurate. Consult a lawyer if you want to be sure, but my understanding is that a patent theoretically covers ALL USE of the invention. No, it is NOT ok to build one yourself for private use without permission; you can (theoretically) get sued for patent infringement. It is true that copies of patents are available for a nominal fee from the patent office, but this is intended as a way of disseminating knowledge and encouraging people to invent further. You still (theoretically) need the patent- holder's approval to USE that information. This is why things like mail-order plans for patented ideas include language about how buying the plans also licenses you to build one copy (or whatever). The intent of patent law is to encourage invention, and public disclosure of the principles of inventions, by giving inventors very strong control over their inventions for a limited period. The idea is that they get a chance to make a profit on the new widget unhampered by ripoff artists, in return for making the technical details public at once and accepting a limit on the duration of their protection against competition. Until that limit runs out, however, they (theoretically) have near-absolute control over what can be done with their invention. In practice it's not that simple, and nobody in his right mind is going to bother suing you over something relatively cheap that you build for your own use, but you are still legally in the wrong. As for what can be done with the Carver box once you buy it, that's a bit trickier. Does selling it to you imply licensing you to use it for your own private consumption? Almost certainly. Does it imply that it's ok to use it for commercial purposes? Much more doubtful; this is prime lawsuit territory, and should be avoided unless your legal and financial resources are ample. Maybe Carver can't enforce such a restriction without a formal contract being signed, but determining this could get very expensive. Henry Spencer U of Toronto