gordon@prls.UUCP (Gordon Vickers) (03/11/89)
In article <6449@dayton.UUCP> jad@dayton.UUCP (J. Deters) writes: > >The X-10 control format has been patented by X-10 Inc. Specifically, >it means that you do not have the license to transmit X-10 format data >over your own power lines. (I personally have a problem with this, but >I understand that It's The Law.) X-10 offers a control module that >is designed specifically for the interested hobbyist. The part number >is PL513, and it comes complete with a license to transmit their signal :-). > I don't beleive this is correct. As I understand it, it is perfectly legal to duplicate (even exactly) anything that is protected by a patent. The restriction is that you SHOULD not then sell the device. If you duplicate a patented device and do so without a license, you still won't be violating any laws. IF the patent owner discovers an infringment and IF he decides to take you to court, then you will probably have to pay the guy/gal some rolalities. Duplicating something that is protected under patent is fine if the device is built for personal use, i.e. not made for profit. Disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer, politicain, or other form of deviate. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Gordon Vickers 408/991-5370 (Sunnyvale,Ca); {mips|pyramid|philabs}!prls!gordon Every extinction, whether animal, mineral, or vegetable, hastens our own demise.
henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) (03/12/89)
In article <19857@prls.UUCP> gordon@prls.UUCP (Gordon Vickers) writes: > I don't beleive this is correct. As I understand it, it is perfectly > legal to duplicate (even exactly) anything that is protected by a patent. > The restriction is that you SHOULD not then sell the device... > Duplicating something that is protected under patent is fine if the > device is built for personal use, i.e. not made for profit. Sorry, this is wrong. You are thinking of copyright law, which has exemptions for "fair use". THERE IS NO SUCH PROVISION IN PATENT LAW. A patent owner has absolute, total control of his invention (assuming he has the resources to find and sue the violators). Building one for your own personal use *is* a patent infringement. Of course, in practice the patent owner (a) probably won't find you, and (b) probably won't bother suing an individual who's not making a profit on it, but legal it's not. -- Welcome to Mars! Your | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology passport and visa, comrade? | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu
wcurtiss@x102c.harris-atd.com (Curtiss WC 67625) (03/13/89)
In article <6449@dayton.UUCP> jad@dayton.UUCP (J. Deters) writes: > >The X-10 control format has been patented by X-10 Inc. Specifically, >it means that you do not have the license to transmit X-10 format data >over your own power lines. (I personally have a problem with this, but >I understand that It's The Law.) X-10 offers a control module that >is designed specifically for the interested hobbyist. The part number >is PL513, and it comes complete with a license to transmit their signal :-). > >-j Just because I want the schematics for the X-10 modules does not mean I plan on building any. At about $10 a piece, it probably would not be cost effective. I have the complete manuals for my car, but I certainly have no intention of building another one. My intention is to understand them, and possibly add a few extra features which X-10 Inc. left out (like local dimming for the wall switch module). Since I brought this up, has anyone done this? I'm still trying to get the schematics. Thanks to those people who sent me leads. We have a limited library system here, so I have to wait until I visit one of the University libraries in another city, to follow up. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- William Curtiss 407/984-6383 | "The only good martyr Harris GISD, Melbourne, FL 32902 | is a dead martyr." Internet: wcurtiss%x102c@trantor.harris-atd.com |
del@Data-IO.COM (Erik Lindberg) (03/18/89)
In article <1684@trantor.harris-atd.com> jad@dayton.UUCP (J. Deters) writes: >In article <6449@dayton.UUCP> jad@dayton.UUCP (J. Deters) writes: >> >>The X-10 control format has been patented by X-10 Inc. Specifically, >>it means that you do not have the license to transmit X-10 format data .,.. > >Just because I want the schematics for the X-10 modules does not mean I >plan on building any. At about $10 a piece, it probably would not be >cost effective. I have the complete manuals for my car, but I >certainly have no intention of building another one. My intention is to >understand them, and possibly add a few extra features which X-10 Inc. left One feature I have always wanted, and none of the X10 devices I have found supports, is the ability for the computer interface to determine the status of the remote modules. Example: my porch light, which I absolutely do not want turned off during certain hours, but don't mind if it is turned on manually during other hours. Currently I have to program the unit to force the light on every half hour during 'critical' time. Not only is this inefficient in terms of timed events, but the porch light could be off for up to 29 minutes. Example 2: My coffee pot is set to be controlled by a controller by the bed. When I wake up I bash the button to start the coffee, dress, and go have a cup. Then I run out of the house and forget to turn off the coffee. If the computer interface could determine that I had turned on the coffee, it could insure that the pot was shut down at some time interval after that. -- del (Erik Lindberg) uw-beaver!tikal!pilchuck!del
tindle@ms.uky.edu (David Herron -- One of the vertebrae) (03/18/89)
If you use TW523/RR501 modules, X-10 will then support two-way communication. These are brand new from X-10 USA. Inc. It's unclear to me whether the RR501 is an RF receiver, which sends data from remote sensors; or whether it allows status reads of control modules. --------------------------\ /------------------------------------------ INTERNET:tindle@ms.uky.edu | "I heard you." -Kirk BITNET:tindle@ukma.bitnet | "He simply could not believe his ears." Ken Tindle - Lexington, KY | -Spock, The Trouble With Tribbles --------------------------/ \------------------------------------------
schuenke@hao.ucar.edu (Jeff Schuenke) (03/21/89)
I am interested in sources for X-10 devices, in particular interfaces to Commodore C-64 computers. Can anyone let me know addresses or phone numbers of suppliers? Thanks in advance. Jeff Schuenke National Center for Atmospheric Research High Altitude Observatory
greg@bilbo (Greg Wageman) (03/21/89)
In article <1132@pilchuck.Data-IO.COM> del@pilchuck.Data-IO.COM (Erik Lindberg) writes: > >One feature I have always wanted, and none of the X10 devices I have found >supports, is the ability for the computer interface to determine the >status of the remote modules. Example: my porch light, which I absolutely >do not want turned off during certain hours, but don't mind if it is >turned on manually during other hours. Currently I have to program the >unit to force the light on every half hour during 'critical' time. Not >only is this inefficient in terms of timed events, but the porch light >could be off for up to 29 minutes. You are talking about closed-loop control. Obviously this is highly desirable. The problem I have with computer-controlling X10 is, what do you do about local-on/off events? Even if you know what state every module "should" be in at a given time of day, a local-on/off event doesn't generate any codes to tell the controller that the state of that module has changed, and should be remembered. Consequently, the controller does the wrong thing when it updates all the modules. There is good news! A recent article in "Circuit Cellar Ink" indicates that the X10 control language has been extended to include a "unit query" code and a "unit status" code. This would allow for the master controller to poll each module periodically to get its current state, which still doesn't solve the local-event problem, but is better than what exists now. The bad news is that, as yet, very few (possible no) modules reply to/generate these new codes. Longish .signature follows. Skip now, or don't complain! Greg Wageman ARPA: greg@sj.ate.slb.com Schlumberger Technologies BIX: gwage 1601 Technology Drive CIS: 74016,352 San Jose, CA 95110-1397 UUCP: ...!uunet!sjsca4!greg (408) 437-5198 ------------------ There's nothing I hate more than a Usenet posting which took three seconds to compose and three minutes to type, glibly dismissing three years (or three decades) of an author's work in three lines. ------------------ Opinions expressed herein are solely the responsibility of the author. (And the author wouldn't have it any other way.)