copyright issues...


Michael <m_d_d@...>
 

--- In TekScopes@y..., Stan or Patricia Griffiths <w7ni@e...> wrote:

I have to say that this apparent total disregard for a company's
copyrights
really has me upset. I realize it is widespread but that does not
make right
or acceptable. Tek Concept Books, Manuals, and Catalogs are ALL
copyrighted
and so far, Tek has expressed the desire to preserve those
copyrights,
demonstrated by refusing to grant permission to people who want to
violate
them. If you want me to boycott this list, just continue to
advocate this
blatant theft of Tek's private property . . .

Stan
Hmmm...

Stan, I doubt that anyone would want you to take such action, and I
don't believe there *is* any such "blatant disregard" here. You
simply need to ask the question:

Is such documentation still available from Tektronix?
If not, what is the "statute of limitations" on such "unavailable"
documentation?

We are dealing with equipment here which is 30 or 40 years old. If
Tektronix is still prepared to supply a manual for my 7603 or my
TM500 system, then I agree that copying same is ethically wrong, and
I should (and indeed would) pay Tek for such documentation, and
furthermore, would be unhappy (yes really!) about copying it.

OTOH, if Tektronix cannot or will not supply such documentation in
2001, then I personally would not be too uneasy about the copying of
such documentation, rather than have my expensive equipment rendered
useless. I suspect that most people, at least in private, would
support this view.

Just my 2c worth
Michael


John Miles <jmiles@...>
 

No offense or disrespect to Stan, certainly, but I tend towards Michael's
point of view on this. If Tek wants to preserve the "right" to "copy" their
literature, they can darned well "copy" it themselves and offer it for
sale... at which point I'll be first in line with my credit card.

Tek's behavior of late has been nothing short of shameful. They had no
qualms about selling a $50,000 spectrum analyzer in 1994, but they'll tell
you to find a short pier and take a long walk if you call them after 1999
asking to buy manuals and parts for your instrument.

My somewhat-anarchic take on the matter is, if Tek won't step up to the
plate and support their products for a reasonable length of time, then they
don't have much of a moral right to complain when their customers do what's
necessary to take support into their own hands.

Is violation of copyright "right"? Of course not; I make my living from
intellectual property and I'm the last guy who wants to see lawlessness in
this area. But then, I wouldn't leave my customers in the lurch after 5
years, either. I can, and do, take support calls from people who bought
software -- software!! -- from me six or seven years ago. Tek can either do
the same with their high-end hardware, or they can get used to the
consequences.

(Of course, this is all a moot point nowadays, as I discovered when I bought
the $100 service manual for my TDS3034 and received a few pages telling me
how to take the back cover off.)

-- jm

----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael" <m_d_d@bigpond.com.au>
To: <TekScopes@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 4:41 AM
Subject: [TekScopes] Re: copyright issues...



--- In TekScopes@y..., Stan or Patricia Griffiths <w7ni@e...> wrote:

I have to say that this apparent total disregard for a company's
copyrights
really has me upset. I realize it is widespread but that does not
make right
or acceptable. Tek Concept Books, Manuals, and Catalogs are ALL
copyrighted
and so far, Tek has expressed the desire to preserve those
copyrights,
demonstrated by refusing to grant permission to people who want to
violate
them. If you want me to boycott this list, just continue to
advocate this
blatant theft of Tek's private property . . .

Stan
Hmmm...

Stan, I doubt that anyone would want you to take such action, and I
don't believe there *is* any such "blatant disregard" here. You
simply need to ask the question:

Is such documentation still available from Tektronix?
If not, what is the "statute of limitations" on such "unavailable"
documentation?

We are dealing with equipment here which is 30 or 40 years old. If
Tektronix is still prepared to supply a manual for my 7603 or my
TM500 system, then I agree that copying same is ethically wrong, and
I should (and indeed would) pay Tek for such documentation, and
furthermore, would be unhappy (yes really!) about copying it.

OTOH, if Tektronix cannot or will not supply such documentation in
2001, then I personally would not be too uneasy about the copying of
such documentation, rather than have my expensive equipment rendered
useless. I suspect that most people, at least in private, would
support this view.

Just my 2c worth
Michael




To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
TekScopes-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



Miroslav Pokorni <mpokorni@...>
 

John,

What do you call 'of late'? I figured that would be since mid 90s. Your
story about $100 manual that tells you only how to take the back cover off,
is not all that surprising, after all Portland is only 150 miles from
Redmond, home of famous Microsoft. I also heard few other stories from
people who bought control knobs from Tektronix and parts did not even fit.

I see all these as a sign of an arrogance, something similar that is seen at
Microsoft. I find it sad that support of few years old equipment and issue
of copyright hangs unresolved because of lack of interest on part of
Tektronix management; they 'have a bigger fish to fry'. But still, what is
copyrighted is theirs to keep and I do not advocate to circumvent copyright
laws, no matter what is Tek's management moral standing.

Regards

Miroslav Pokorni

-----Original Message-----
From: John Miles [mailto:jmiles@pop.net]
Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 11:20 AM
To: TekScopes@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [TekScopes] Re: copyright issues...

No offense or disrespect to Stan, certainly, but I tend
towards Michael's
point of view on this. If Tek wants to preserve the "right"
to "copy" their
literature, they can darned well "copy" it themselves and
offer it for
sale... at which point I'll be first in line with my credit
card.

Tek's behavior of late has been nothing short of shameful.
They had no
qualms about selling a $50,000 spectrum analyzer in 1994,
but they'll tell
you to find a short pier and take a long walk if you call
them after 1999
asking to buy manuals and parts for your instrument.

My somewhat-anarchic take on the matter is, if Tek won't
step up to the
plate and support their products for a reasonable length of
time, then they
don't have much of a moral right to complain when their
customers do what's
necessary to take support into their own hands.

Is violation of copyright "right"? Of course not; I make my
living from
intellectual property and I'm the last guy who wants to see
lawlessness in
this area. But then, I wouldn't leave my customers in the
lurch after 5
years, either. I can, and do, take support calls from
people who bought
software -- software!! -- from me six or seven years ago.
Tek can either do
the same with their high-end hardware, or they can get used
to the
consequences.

(Of course, this is all a moot point nowadays, as I
discovered when I bought
the $100 service manual for my TDS3034 and received a few
pages telling me
how to take the back cover off.)

-- jm

----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael" <m_d_d@bigpond.com.au>
To: <TekScopes@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 4:41 AM
Subject: [TekScopes] Re: copyright issues...


>
> --- In TekScopes@y..., Stan or Patricia Griffiths
<w7ni@e...> wrote:
>
> > I have to say that this apparent total disregard for a
company's
> copyrights
> > really has me upset. I realize it is widespread but
that does not
> make right
> > or acceptable. Tek Concept Books, Manuals, and Catalogs
are ALL
> copyrighted
> > and so far, Tek has expressed the desire to preserve
those
> copyrights,
> > demonstrated by refusing to grant permission to people
who want to
> violate
> > them. If you want me to boycott this list, just
continue to
> advocate this
> > blatant theft of Tek's private property . . .
> >
> > Stan
>
> Hmmm...
>
> Stan, I doubt that anyone would want you to take such
action, and I
> don't believe there *is* any such "blatant disregard"
here. You
> simply need to ask the question:
>
> Is such documentation still available from Tektronix?
> If not, what is the "statute of limitations" on such
"unavailable"
> documentation?
>
> We are dealing with equipment here which is 30 or 40 years
old. If
> Tektronix is still prepared to supply a manual for my 7603
or my
> TM500 system, then I agree that copying same is ethically
wrong, and
> I should (and indeed would) pay Tek for such
documentation, and
> furthermore, would be unhappy (yes really!) about copying
it.
>
> OTOH, if Tektronix cannot or will not supply such
documentation in
> 2001, then I personally would not be too uneasy about the
copying of
> such documentation, rather than have my expensive
equipment rendered
> useless. I suspect that most people, at least in private,
would
> support this view.
>
> Just my 2c worth
> Michael
>
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> TekScopes-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
TekScopes-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


John Miles <jmiles@...>
 

I'm not sure how long they've had the five-year end-of-support policy. I
know I've been able to order stuff from Agilent to repair 30-year-old HP141T
plugins, though. Sure, you'll pay out the nose, and some parts are out of
stock, but it's rare to call HP/Agilent and be told, "Sorry, we no longer
sell any parts at all for that instrument."

I do make a clear distinction between service manuals versus things like the
Tek Circuit Concepts books. Tek published the latter series as an aid to
their marketing efforts and as a favor to its customers; the CC books were
never intended to be critical resources for users of specific items
purchased from Tek. Even though they're all out of print, I am certainly
not advocating copying these books beyond the auspices of fair use.

Manuals, though... boy, you're going to have a hard time convincing me that
books which are by definition tied to a particular piece of hardware should
even be copyrighted in the first place, except to stop competitors like
Lavoie and Hickok from making "Chinese copies."

If there are only 10,000 examples of a particular instrument in existence,
and Tek printed 10,000 manuals to go with them, why on Earth should anyone
care if a copy is made to replace a discarded original? There are still
only 10,000 copies of the manual that will ever be used or resold. Should I
have to scrap my 494P because there are N 494Ps but only N-1 manuals for
them out there?

At least in the old days, a good technical manual was considered as much a
part of an instrument as the knobs on the front panel. Tek and HP were
among the companies who established this expectation in the first place.
Why should we lose the functionality of our equipment just because a prior
owner was irresponsible enough to throw its original manual away? Sure,
that's not Tek's problem, but there's no reason why it should be our
problem, either. I just can't see whose ox is being gored here.

-- jm

----- Original Message -----
From: Miroslav Pokorni <mpokorni@camintonn.com>
To: <TekScopes@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 1:36 PM
Subject: RE: [TekScopes] Re: copyright issues...


John,

What do you call 'of late'? I figured that would be since mid 90s. Your
story about $100 manual that tells you only how to take the back cover
off,
is not all that surprising, after all Portland is only 150 miles from
Redmond, home of famous Microsoft. I also heard few other stories from
people who bought control knobs from Tektronix and parts did not even fit.

I see all these as a sign of an arrogance, something similar that is seen
at
Microsoft. I find it sad that support of few years old equipment and issue
of copyright hangs unresolved because of lack of interest on part of
Tektronix management; they 'have a bigger fish to fry'. But still, what is
copyrighted is theirs to keep and I do not advocate to circumvent
copyright
laws, no matter what is Tek's management moral standing.

Regards

Miroslav Pokorni



-----Original Message-----
From: John Miles [mailto:jmiles@pop.net]
Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 11:20 AM
To: TekScopes@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [TekScopes] Re: copyright issues...

No offense or disrespect to Stan, certainly, but I tend
towards Michael's
point of view on this. If Tek wants to preserve the "right"
to "copy" their
literature, they can darned well "copy" it themselves and
offer it for
sale... at which point I'll be first in line with my credit
card.

Tek's behavior of late has been nothing short of shameful.
They had no
qualms about selling a $50,000 spectrum analyzer in 1994,
but they'll tell
you to find a short pier and take a long walk if you call
them after 1999
asking to buy manuals and parts for your instrument.

My somewhat-anarchic take on the matter is, if Tek won't
step up to the
plate and support their products for a reasonable length of
time, then they
don't have much of a moral right to complain when their
customers do what's
necessary to take support into their own hands.

Is violation of copyright "right"? Of course not; I make my
living from
intellectual property and I'm the last guy who wants to see
lawlessness in
this area. But then, I wouldn't leave my customers in the
lurch after 5
years, either. I can, and do, take support calls from
people who bought
software -- software!! -- from me six or seven years ago.
Tek can either do
the same with their high-end hardware, or they can get used
to the
consequences.

(Of course, this is all a moot point nowadays, as I
discovered when I bought
the $100 service manual for my TDS3034 and received a few
pages telling me
how to take the back cover off.)

-- jm

----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael" <m_d_d@bigpond.com.au>
To: <TekScopes@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 4:41 AM
Subject: [TekScopes] Re: copyright issues...



--- In TekScopes@y..., Stan or Patricia Griffiths
<w7ni@e...> wrote:

I have to say that this apparent total disregard for a
company's
copyrights
really has me upset. I realize it is widespread but
that does not
make right
or acceptable. Tek Concept Books, Manuals, and Catalogs
are ALL
copyrighted
and so far, Tek has expressed the desire to preserve
those
copyrights,
demonstrated by refusing to grant permission to people
who want to
violate
them. If you want me to boycott this list, just
continue to
advocate this
blatant theft of Tek's private property . . .

Stan
Hmmm...

Stan, I doubt that anyone would want you to take such
action, and I
don't believe there *is* any such "blatant disregard"
here. You
simply need to ask the question:

Is such documentation still available from Tektronix?
If not, what is the "statute of limitations" on such
"unavailable"
documentation?

We are dealing with equipment here which is 30 or 40 years
old. If
Tektronix is still prepared to supply a manual for my 7603
or my
TM500 system, then I agree that copying same is ethically
wrong, and
I should (and indeed would) pay Tek for such
documentation, and
furthermore, would be unhappy (yes really!) about copying
it.

OTOH, if Tektronix cannot or will not supply such
documentation in
2001, then I personally would not be too uneasy about the
copying of
such documentation, rather than have my expensive
equipment rendered
useless. I suspect that most people, at least in private,
would
support this view.

Just my 2c worth
Michael




To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
TekScopes-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
TekScopes-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/







To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
TekScopes-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



jstanton@...
 

I think Stan is way off line here. First of all you need to know
something about copyright law, which we have had to understand since
our income is from our intellectual property (software and manuals).

Copyright must be maintained by the holder, and if the holder is
disinterested in enforcing their copyright, they lose it. For
example if Tektronix has not assiduously protected their copyright on
old manuals they probably no longer have a copyright and the manuals
can be copied with impunity. From a legal perspective their well-
known failure to prosecute vendors of copies weakens and possibly
invalidates their copyright. One might contact them and seek to
negotiate a per-copy royalty as an objective test of their interest
in protecting copyright before distributing copies.

ou should also note that a copyright does not last forever. Wm
Shakespeare's descendants dont get royalties and "Old Gold" radio
station format is so popular because they play music that is out of
copyright and save on royalties.

As for shameful behaviour, Tek certainly qualifies. When I compare
the level of support we get from IBM on our old IBM equipment Tek
fails badly. IBM keeps documentation on line as a service for their
customers and as a demonstration that they can be trusted as a long-
term vendor (up until recently the FAA was using IBM 360 machines
from the 1960's!). Hewlett-Packard is also good at maintaining
support for its legacy products.

I would not be surprised if a group offered to supply Tek
documentation on line that Tek would very readily agree since it
would permit them to deliver better customer support at no cost to
themselves.

I have placed some Tek manuals into PDF format by OCRing the text and
scanning the schematics at high resolution. They look very nice when
printed on high quality paper using our Tektronix Phaser 850 color
printer and comb-bound. I have only done it so far for damaged or
mutilated manuals that I own - certainly no copyright violation. I
could probably make them available on our web site for a private
group, using the component of copyright law that permits you to lend
books to friends and for libraries to exist for members. The onus
would be on the viewer not to make a copy unless a legal right
existed.

I am not trying to encourage the theft of intellectual property; that
is just plain wrong. However it could be that the people who were
feeling guilty in fact, by accident, did not violate any laws.

Regards

John Stanton

--- In TekScopes@y..., "John Miles" <jmiles@p...> wrote:
I'm not sure how long they've had the five-year end-of-support
policy. I
know I've been able to order stuff from Agilent to repair 30-year-
old HP141T
plugins, though. Sure, you'll pay out the nose, and some parts are
out of
stock, but it's rare to call HP/Agilent and be told, "Sorry, we no
longer
sell any parts at all for that instrument."

I do make a clear distinction between service manuals versus things
like the
Tek Circuit Concepts books. Tek published the latter series as an
aid to
their marketing efforts and as a favor to its customers; the CC
books were
never intended to be critical resources for users of specific items
purchased from Tek. Even though they're all out of print, I am
certainly
not advocating copying these books beyond the auspices of fair use.

Manuals, though... boy, you're going to have a hard time convincing
me that
books which are by definition tied to a particular piece of
hardware should
even be copyrighted in the first place, except to stop competitors
like
Lavoie and Hickok from making "Chinese copies."

If there are only 10,000 examples of a particular instrument in
existence,
and Tek printed 10,000 manuals to go with them, why on Earth should
anyone
care if a copy is made to replace a discarded original? There are
still
only 10,000 copies of the manual that will ever be used or resold.
Should I
have to scrap my 494P because there are N 494Ps but only N-1
manuals for
them out there?

At least in the old days, a good technical manual was considered as
much a
part of an instrument as the knobs on the front panel. Tek and HP
were
among the companies who established this expectation in the first
place.
Why should we lose the functionality of our equipment just because
a prior
owner was irresponsible enough to throw its original manual away?
Sure,
that's not Tek's problem, but there's no reason why it should be our
problem, either. I just can't see whose ox is being gored here.

-- jm


----- Original Message -----
From: Miroslav Pokorni <mpokorni@c...>
To: <TekScopes@y...>
Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 1:36 PM
Subject: RE: [TekScopes] Re: copyright issues...


John,

What do you call 'of late'? I figured that would be since mid
90s. Your
story about $100 manual that tells you only how to take the back
cover
off,
is not all that surprising, after all Portland is only 150 miles
from
Redmond, home of famous Microsoft. I also heard few other stories
from
people who bought control knobs from Tektronix and parts did not
even fit.

I see all these as a sign of an arrogance, something similar that
is seen
at
Microsoft. I find it sad that support of few years old equipment
and issue
of copyright hangs unresolved because of lack of interest on part
of
Tektronix management; they 'have a bigger fish to fry'. But
still, what is
copyrighted is theirs to keep and I do not advocate to circumvent
copyright
laws, no matter what is Tek's management moral standing.

Regards

Miroslav Pokorni



-----Original Message-----
From: John Miles [mailto:jmiles@p...]
Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 11:20 AM
To: TekScopes@y...
Subject: Re: [TekScopes] Re: copyright issues...

No offense or disrespect to Stan, certainly, but I tend
towards Michael's
point of view on this. If Tek wants to preserve the "right"
to "copy" their
literature, they can darned well "copy" it themselves and
offer it for
sale... at which point I'll be first in line with my credit
card.

Tek's behavior of late has been nothing short of shameful.
They had no
qualms about selling a $50,000 spectrum analyzer in 1994,
but they'll tell
you to find a short pier and take a long walk if you call
them after 1999
asking to buy manuals and parts for your instrument.

My somewhat-anarchic take on the matter is, if Tek won't
step up to the
plate and support their products for a reasonable length of
time, then they
don't have much of a moral right to complain when their
customers do what's
necessary to take support into their own hands.

Is violation of copyright "right"? Of course not; I make my
living from
intellectual property and I'm the last guy who wants to see
lawlessness in
this area. But then, I wouldn't leave my customers in the
lurch after 5
years, either. I can, and do, take support calls from
people who bought
software -- software!! -- from me six or seven years ago.
Tek can either do
the same with their high-end hardware, or they can get used
to the
consequences.

(Of course, this is all a moot point nowadays, as I
discovered when I bought
the $100 service manual for my TDS3034 and received a few
pages telling me
how to take the back cover off.)

-- jm

----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael" <m_d_d@b...>
To: <TekScopes@y...>
Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 4:41 AM
Subject: [TekScopes] Re: copyright issues...



--- In TekScopes@y..., Stan or Patricia Griffiths
<w7ni@e...> wrote:

I have to say that this apparent total disregard for a
company's
copyrights
really has me upset. I realize it is widespread but
that does not
make right
or acceptable. Tek Concept Books, Manuals, and Catalogs
are ALL
copyrighted
and so far, Tek has expressed the desire to preserve
those
copyrights,
demonstrated by refusing to grant permission to people
who want to
violate
them. If you want me to boycott this list, just
continue to
advocate this
blatant theft of Tek's private property . . .

Stan
Hmmm...

Stan, I doubt that anyone would want you to take such
action, and I
don't believe there *is* any such "blatant disregard"
here. You
simply need to ask the question:

Is such documentation still available from Tektronix?
If not, what is the "statute of limitations" on such
"unavailable"
documentation?

We are dealing with equipment here which is 30 or 40 years
old. If
Tektronix is still prepared to supply a manual for my 7603
or my
TM500 system, then I agree that copying same is ethically
wrong, and
I should (and indeed would) pay Tek for such
documentation, and
furthermore, would be unhappy (yes really!) about copying
it.

OTOH, if Tektronix cannot or will not supply such
documentation in
2001, then I personally would not be too uneasy about the
copying of
such documentation, rather than have my expensive
equipment rendered
useless. I suspect that most people, at least in private,
would
support this view.

Just my 2c worth
Michael




To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
TekScopes-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
TekScopes-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/







To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
TekScopes-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



Ed Jacobson <enj99@...>
 

For the amount of money that they charge for scopes and documents, I don't give a damn about their copyrights.

<html></html>



From: jstanton@viacognis.com
Reply-To: TekScopes@yahoogroups.com
To: TekScopes@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [TekScopes] Re: copyright issues...
Date: Sat, 15 Sep 2001 20:04:44 -0000

I think Stan is way off line here. First of all you need to know
something about copyright law, which we have had to understand since
our income is from our intellectual property (software and manuals).

Copyright must be maintained by the holder, and if the holder is
disinterested in enforcing their copyright, they lose it. For
example if Tektronix has not assiduously protected their copyright on
old manuals they probably no longer have a copyright and the manuals
can be copied with impunity. From a legal perspective their well-
known failure to prosecute vendors of copies weakens and possibly
invalidates their copyright. One might contact them and seek to
negotiate a per-copy royalty as an objective test of their interest
in protecting copyright before distributing copies.

ou should also note that a copyright does not last forever. Wm
Shakespeare's descendants dont get royalties and "Old Gold" radio
station format is so popular because they play music that is out of
copyright and save on royalties.

As for shameful behaviour, Tek certainly qualifies. When I compare
the level of support we get from IBM on our old IBM equipment Tek
fails badly. IBM keeps documentation on line as a service for their
customers and as a demonstration that they can be trusted as a long-
term vendor (up until recently the FAA was using IBM 360 machines
from the 1960's!). Hewlett-Packard is also good at maintaining
support for its legacy products.

I would not be surprised if a group offered to supply Tek
documentation on line that Tek would very readily agree since it
would permit them to deliver better customer support at no cost to
themselves.

I have placed some Tek manuals into PDF format by OCRing the text and
scanning the schematics at high resolution. They look very nice when
printed on high quality paper using our Tektronix Phaser 850 color
printer and comb-bound. I have only done it so far for damaged or
mutilated manuals that I own - certainly no copyright violation. I
could probably make them available on our web site for a private
group, using the component of copyright law that permits you to lend
books to friends and for libraries to exist for members. The onus
would be on the viewer not to make a copy unless a legal right
existed.

I am not trying to encourage the theft of intellectual property; that
is just plain wrong. However it could be that the people who were
feeling guilty in fact, by accident, did not violate any laws.

Regards

John Stanton

--- In TekScopes@y..., "John Miles" <jmiles@p...> wrote:
I'm not sure how long they've had the five-year end-of-support
policy. I
know I've been able to order stuff from Agilent to repair 30-year-
old HP141T
plugins, though. Sure, you'll pay out the nose, and some parts are
out of
stock, but it's rare to call HP/Agilent and be told, "Sorry, we no
longer
sell any parts at all for that instrument."

I do make a clear distinction between service manuals versus things
like the
Tek Circuit Concepts books. Tek published the latter series as an
aid to
their marketing efforts and as a favor to its customers; the CC
books were
never intended to be critical resources for users of specific items
purchased from Tek. Even though they're all out of print, I am
certainly
not advocating copying these books beyond the auspices of fair use.

Manuals, though... boy, you're going to have a hard time convincing
me that
books which are by definition tied to a particular piece of
hardware should
even be copyrighted in the first place, except to stop competitors
like
Lavoie and Hickok from making "Chinese copies."

If there are only 10,000 examples of a particular instrument in
existence,
and Tek printed 10,000 manuals to go with them, why on Earth should
anyone
care if a copy is made to replace a discarded original? There are
still
only 10,000 copies of the manual that will ever be used or resold.
Should I
have to scrap my 494P because there are N 494Ps but only N-1
manuals for
them out there?

At least in the old days, a good technical manual was considered as
much a
part of an instrument as the knobs on the front panel. Tek and HP
were
among the companies who established this expectation in the first
place.
Why should we lose the functionality of our equipment just because
a prior
owner was irresponsible enough to throw its original manual away?
Sure,
that's not Tek's problem, but there's no reason why it should be our
problem, either. I just can't see whose ox is being gored here.

-- jm


----- Original Message -----
From: Miroslav Pokorni <mpokorni@c...>
To: <TekScopes@y...>
Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 1:36 PM
Subject: RE: [TekScopes] Re: copyright issues...


John,

What do you call 'of late'? I figured that would be since mid
90s. Your
story about $100 manual that tells you only how to take the back
cover
off,
is not all that surprising, after all Portland is only 150 miles
from
Redmond, home of famous Microsoft. I also heard few other stories
from
people who bought control knobs from Tektronix and parts did not
even fit.

I see all these as a sign of an arrogance, something similar that
is seen
at
Microsoft. I find it sad that support of few years old equipment
and issue
of copyright hangs unresolved because of lack of interest on part
of
Tektronix management; they 'have a bigger fish to fry'. But
still, what is
copyrighted is theirs to keep and I do not advocate to circumvent
copyright
laws, no matter what is Tek's management moral standing.

Regards

Miroslav Pokorni



-----Original Message-----
From: John Miles [mailto:jmiles@p...]
Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 11:20 AM
To: TekScopes@y...
Subject: Re: [TekScopes] Re: copyright issues...

No offense or disrespect to Stan, certainly, but I tend
towards Michael's
point of view on this. If Tek wants to preserve the "right"
to "copy" their
literature, they can darned well "copy" it themselves and
offer it for
sale... at which point I'll be first in line with my credit
card.

Tek's behavior of late has been nothing short of shameful.
They had no
qualms about selling a $50,000 spectrum analyzer in 1994,
but they'll tell
you to find a short pier and take a long walk if you call
them after 1999
asking to buy manuals and parts for your instrument.

My somewhat-anarchic take on the matter is, if Tek won't
step up to the
plate and support their products for a reasonable length of
time, then they
don't have much of a moral right to complain when their
customers do what's
necessary to take support into their own hands.

Is violation of copyright "right"? Of course not; I make my
living from
intellectual property and I'm the last guy who wants to see
lawlessness in
this area. But then, I wouldn't leave my customers in the
lurch after 5
years, either. I can, and do, take support calls from
people who bought
software -- software!! -- from me six or seven years ago.
Tek can either do
the same with their high-end hardware, or they can get used
to the
consequences.

(Of course, this is all a moot point nowadays, as I
discovered when I bought
the $100 service manual for my TDS3034 and received a few
pages telling me
how to take the back cover off.)

-- jm

----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael" <m_d_d@b...>
To: <TekScopes@y...>
Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 4:41 AM
Subject: [TekScopes] Re: copyright issues...



--- In TekScopes@y..., Stan or Patricia Griffiths
<w7ni@e...> wrote:

I have to say that this apparent total disregard for a
company's
copyrights
really has me upset. I realize it is widespread but
that does not
make right
or acceptable. Tek Concept Books, Manuals, and Catalogs
are ALL
copyrighted
and so far, Tek has expressed the desire to preserve
those
copyrights,
demonstrated by refusing to grant permission to people
who want to
violate
them. If you want me to boycott this list, just
continue to
advocate this
blatant theft of Tek's private property . . .

Stan
Hmmm...

Stan, I doubt that anyone would want you to take such
action, and I
don't believe there *is* any such "blatant disregard"
here. You
simply need to ask the question:

Is such documentation still available from Tektronix?
If not, what is the "statute of limitations" on such
"unavailable"
documentation?

We are dealing with equipment here which is 30 or 40 years
old. If
Tektronix is still prepared to supply a manual for my 7603
or my
TM500 system, then I agree that copying same is ethically
wrong, and
I should (and indeed would) pay Tek for such
documentation, and
furthermore, would be unhappy (yes really!) about copying
it.

OTOH, if Tektronix cannot or will not supply such
documentation in
2001, then I personally would not be too uneasy about the
copying of
such documentation, rather than have my expensive
equipment rendered
useless. I suspect that most people, at least in private,
would
support this view.

Just my 2c worth
Michael




To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
TekScopes-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
TekScopes-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/






To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
TekScopes-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp


Stan or Patricia Griffiths <w7ni@...>
 

I am not aware of any "statute of limitations" on copyrighted materials such
as technical manuals. I will, however, call my friend who is a patents and
copyright attorney working in the Tektronix Legal Department and ask him for
his opinion on this subject. He is the same guy who I have been asking
(unsuccessfully) to help me obtain official Tektronix permission to publish
copyrighted materials. I would LOVE to be in the business of making
legitimite copies of early Tek technical materials.

I will share here what I learn from him.

There are a lot of unpopular laws in this country but I think there is a lot
of risk in flaunting them.

You may think it OK to copy old materials that are out of print and that Tek
is not harmed since they no longer offer them for sale. Well, I can tell you
that at least some influential people inside of Tek have the view that these
old, technically unsupported instruments DO, indeed, have a negative effect
on Tek's current business. However wrong they may be, these people believe
that at least SOME of those old instruments are displacing some sales of new
Tek products and it would be inTek's best interests to NOT make those old
documents available. I personally HATE that philosphy but it exists and I
don't know of a legal way the thwart it.

Hey, I personally authored and published a book on Tek scopes (with official
permission from Tek where it was required). It would certainly be
hypocritical of me to defend my own copyrights and ignore Tek's, wouldn't it?

Stan
w7ni@easystreet.com

Michael wrote:

--- In TekScopes@y..., Stan or Patricia Griffiths <w7ni@e...> wrote:

I have to say that this apparent total disregard for a company's
copyrights
really has me upset. I realize it is widespread but that does not
make right
or acceptable. Tek Concept Books, Manuals, and Catalogs are ALL
copyrighted
and so far, Tek has expressed the desire to preserve those
copyrights,
demonstrated by refusing to grant permission to people who want to
violate
them. If you want me to boycott this list, just continue to
advocate this
blatant theft of Tek's private property . . .

Stan
Hmmm...

Stan, I doubt that anyone would want you to take such action, and I
don't believe there *is* any such "blatant disregard" here. You
simply need to ask the question:

Is such documentation still available from Tektronix?
If not, what is the "statute of limitations" on such "unavailable"
documentation?

We are dealing with equipment here which is 30 or 40 years old. If
Tektronix is still prepared to supply a manual for my 7603 or my
TM500 system, then I agree that copying same is ethically wrong, and
I should (and indeed would) pay Tek for such documentation, and
furthermore, would be unhappy (yes really!) about copying it.

OTOH, if Tektronix cannot or will not supply such documentation in
2001, then I personally would not be too uneasy about the copying of
such documentation, rather than have my expensive equipment rendered
useless. I suspect that most people, at least in private, would
support this view.

Just my 2c worth
Michael


To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
TekScopes-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


Stan or Patricia Griffiths <w7ni@...>
 

Hi John,

I am pretty familiar with how Tektronix has behaved toward supporting some of
their equipment in the last two decades or so. I spent a total of 26.5 years of
my life on Tek's payroll and, finally, in late 1989, got so disturbed by what I
saw happening inside of Tektronix that I resigned my job as their Spectrum
Analyzer Sales Engineer in the Pacific Northwest. Believe me, this was not an
easy move for me. I seriously thought I would NEVER leave Tek. I was wrong.

I still have many very fond memories of life at Tektronix in the 60's and 70's
and that is the part of Tek's history that I enjoy reliving with my old
collection.

Still, they own that documented material and have refused to let me have it. I
am just not willing to steal it from them.

How about a letter campaign to get Tek to let up on burying that copyrighted
material?

Stan
w7ni@easystreet.com

John Miles wrote:

No offense or disrespect to Stan, certainly, but I tend towards Michael's
point of view on this. If Tek wants to preserve the "right" to "copy" their
literature, they can darned well "copy" it themselves and offer it for
sale... at which point I'll be first in line with my credit card.

Tek's behavior of late has been nothing short of shameful. They had no
qualms about selling a $50,000 spectrum analyzer in 1994, but they'll tell
you to find a short pier and take a long walk if you call them after 1999
asking to buy manuals and parts for your instrument.

My somewhat-anarchic take on the matter is, if Tek won't step up to the
plate and support their products for a reasonable length of time, then they
don't have much of a moral right to complain when their customers do what's
necessary to take support into their own hands.

Is violation of copyright "right"? Of course not; I make my living from
intellectual property and I'm the last guy who wants to see lawlessness in
this area. But then, I wouldn't leave my customers in the lurch after 5
years, either. I can, and do, take support calls from people who bought
software -- software!! -- from me six or seven years ago. Tek can either do
the same with their high-end hardware, or they can get used to the
consequences.

(Of course, this is all a moot point nowadays, as I discovered when I bought
the $100 service manual for my TDS3034 and received a few pages telling me
how to take the back cover off.)

-- jm


Stan or Patricia Griffiths <w7ni@...>
 

HiJohn,

I appreciate your opinions and you are certainly entitled to them. I have
inserted some comments below and I solicit your additional comments to
support your position. Read on and respond, please:

jstanton@viacognis.com wrote:

I think Stan is way off line here. First of all you need to know
something about copyright law, which we have had to understand since
our income is from our intellectual property (software and manuals).
I agree which is why I consulted an attorney on this subject and intend to
consult yet another attorney employed by the Tektronix Legal Department.

Copyright must be maintained by the holder, and if the holder is
disinterested in enforcing their copyright, they lose it. For
example if Tektronix has not assiduously protected their copyright on
old manuals they probably no longer have a copyright and the manuals
can be copied with impunity.
It sounds to me like you are not sure about how long copyrights are
automatically valid and that you should do some of this research on the
copyright laws and share some legal opinions here with us instead of
"guessing" about it.

From a legal perspective their well-
known failure to prosecute vendors of copies weakens and possibly
invalidates their copyright.
"Possibly" . . . and possibly not . . .

One might contact them and seek to
negotiate a per-copy royalty as an objective test of their interest
in protecting copyright before distributing copies.
My several contacts with Tektronix on this subject have never indicated they
would actually grant me permission under any circumstances. All they ever
said was that they would "consider it" and then they fell silent on the
subject.

ou should also note that a copyright does not last forever.
That's true but I indicated in another email to this group that for materials
copyrighted before 1964 and possibly before that, the attorney I consulted
told me they were still valid today and well into the next couple of decades.

Wm
Shakespeare's descendants dont get royalties and "Old Gold" radio
station format is so popular because they play music that is out of
copyright and save on royalties.

As for shameful behaviour, Tek certainly qualifies. When I compare
the level of support we get from IBM on our old IBM equipment Tek
fails badly. IBM keeps documentation on line as a service for their
customers and as a demonstration that they can be trusted as a long-
term vendor (up until recently the FAA was using IBM 360 machines
from the 1960's!). Hewlett-Packard is also good at maintaining
support for its legacy products.
Irrelevant.

I would not be surprised if a group offered to supply Tek
documentation on line that Tek would very readily agree since it
would permit them to deliver better customer support at no cost to
themselves.
I would be darned surprised !

I have placed some Tek manuals into PDF format by OCRing the text and
scanning the schematics at high resolution. They look very nice when
printed on high quality paper using our Tektronix Phaser 850 color
printer and comb-bound. I have only done it so far for damaged or
mutilated manuals that I own - certainly no copyright violation. I
could probably make them available on our web site for a private
group, using the component of copyright law that permits you to lend
books to friends and for libraries to exist for members. The onus
would be on the viewer not to make a copy unless a legal right
existed.
There is no doubt that you can lend an original copy of a book to a friend.
It MAY be OK to make a copy of a book for your own use. I would guess that
lending a copy of a book to a friend is stepping over the line . . . I will
be pretty angry if you make a copy of my book and lend it to your friends . .
.

I am not trying to encourage the theft of intellectual property; that
is just plain wrong. However it could be that the people who were
feeling guilty in fact, by accident, did not violate any laws.

Regards

John Stanton
You don't actually have to violate any laws yourself to be in a position of
supporting those who do. I bought an estate with hundreds of original Tek
manuals in it and dozens of copies. After thinking about it, I decided it
would not be ethical for me to sell the copies and withdrew any offers I had
made to sell them. I didn't even do the copying . . .

Stan
w7ni@easystreet.com


Stan or Patricia Griffiths <w7ni@...>
 

Wow, Ed. Those are pretty strong words. I certainly hope, for your sake,
that you never need to ask me for any technical assistance or parts support .
. .

Stan
w7ni@easystreet.com

Ed Jacobson wrote:

For the amount of money that they charge for scopes and documents, I don't
give a damn about their copyrights.


John Miles <jmiles@...>
 

I think what's happening here is that John is confusing copyrights with
trademarks. Trademarks do have to be defended actively and vigorously to
remain valid -- this is why Coca-Cola sends people into restaurants to
determine if the restaurant is serving Pepsi in response to requests for
"Coke." Xerox is another common example -- they become quite perturbed at
people who refer to photocopiers in general as "Xerox machines." Both these
companies are trying to keep their trade names out of the public domain, a
fate which befell the original manufacturers of products such as aspirin and
formica.

I believe that patents and copyrights, as Stan says, can be asserted
selectively, or not at all, and still remain valid. Anyone who's been
following the sordid Rambus story can attest to the evils of "submarine"
patents that are kept undisclosed for years and then sprung onto a hapless
competitor the minute there's money to be made.

In agreement with Stan, I don't think those who distribute copies of
copyrighted manuals have a leg to stand on, legally speaking. I wonder if
you (Stan) would have any suggestions as to whom at Tektronix we should be
addressing our requests? I wouldn't mind sending a brief letter proposing
(for example):

- Tek releases its copyright interests in operating and service manuals for
instruments for which it no longer provides parts, manuals, or support
(perhaps after a certain blackout period, say 7-10 years for instruments
that were disowned 5 years after production ended)
- Tek releases its copyright interests in the Circuit Concepts series, due
to its technical obsolescence and historical interest
- Failing that, Tek transfers copyright interest to a reputable third party
(such as Bill and Stan's site) that has already been shown to be a valuable
resource for Tek's customers.

The trick would be to keep the letter from sounding like a one-sided plea
for a bunch of free stuff. It should be possible to convince Tek management
that community support for obsolete instruments adds real value to their
existing customer relationships. (This may be an uphill fight since, for
instance, a 5-year-old spectrum analyzer is 95% as good as a brand-new one
in many respects. Hopefully they can be persuaded that their goals of
"planned obsolescence" are adequately met by cutting off the spare-parts
supply.)

Even though it would not be addressed to the customer service department,
such a letter should certainly be cc:'ed to them. I'm sure the
phone-support people would love to be able to tell customers something
besides "Get lost" when they receive calls for obsolete manuals or tech
support. They could be useful internal allies.

Any names and addresses in mind? I would be glad to volunteer to put some
time into this, posting drafts on this list for review, if we could get Bill
and Stan and, ideally, Deane to sign the letter once everyone is satisfied
with the wording.

-- jm

----- Original Message -----
From: "Stan or Patricia Griffiths" <w7ni@easystreet.com>
To: <TekScopes@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2001 10:01 PM
Subject: Re: [TekScopes] Re: copyright issues...


HiJohn,

I appreciate your opinions and you are certainly entitled to them. I have
inserted some comments below and I solicit your additional comments to
support your position. Read on and respond, please:

jstanton@viacognis.com wrote:

I think Stan is way off line here. First of all you need to know
something about copyright law, which we have had to understand since
our income is from our intellectual property (software and manuals).
I agree which is why I consulted an attorney on this subject and intend to
consult yet another attorney employed by the Tektronix Legal Department.

Copyright must be maintained by the holder, and if the holder is
disinterested in enforcing their copyright, they lose it. For
example if Tektronix has not assiduously protected their copyright on
old manuals they probably no longer have a copyright and the manuals
can be copied with impunity.
It sounds to me like you are not sure about how long copyrights are
automatically valid and that you should do some of this research on the
copyright laws and share some legal opinions here with us instead of
"guessing" about it.

From a legal perspective their well-
known failure to prosecute vendors of copies weakens and possibly
invalidates their copyright.
"Possibly" . . . and possibly not . . .

One might contact them and seek to
negotiate a per-copy royalty as an objective test of their interest
in protecting copyright before distributing copies.
My several contacts with Tektronix on this subject have never indicated
they
would actually grant me permission under any circumstances. All they ever
said was that they would "consider it" and then they fell silent on the
subject.

ou should also note that a copyright does not last forever.
That's true but I indicated in another email to this group that for
materials
copyrighted before 1964 and possibly before that, the attorney I consulted
told me they were still valid today and well into the next couple of
decades.

Wm
Shakespeare's descendants dont get royalties and "Old Gold" radio
station format is so popular because they play music that is out of
copyright and save on royalties.

As for shameful behaviour, Tek certainly qualifies. When I compare
the level of support we get from IBM on our old IBM equipment Tek
fails badly. IBM keeps documentation on line as a service for their
customers and as a demonstration that they can be trusted as a long-
term vendor (up until recently the FAA was using IBM 360 machines
from the 1960's!). Hewlett-Packard is also good at maintaining
support for its legacy products.
Irrelevant.

I would not be surprised if a group offered to supply Tek
documentation on line that Tek would very readily agree since it
would permit them to deliver better customer support at no cost to
themselves.
I would be darned surprised !

I have placed some Tek manuals into PDF format by OCRing the text and
scanning the schematics at high resolution. They look very nice when
printed on high quality paper using our Tektronix Phaser 850 color
printer and comb-bound. I have only done it so far for damaged or
mutilated manuals that I own - certainly no copyright violation. I
could probably make them available on our web site for a private
group, using the component of copyright law that permits you to lend
books to friends and for libraries to exist for members. The onus
would be on the viewer not to make a copy unless a legal right
existed.
There is no doubt that you can lend an original copy of a book to a
friend.
It MAY be OK to make a copy of a book for your own use. I would guess
that
lending a copy of a book to a friend is stepping over the line . . . I
will
be pretty angry if you make a copy of my book and lend it to your friends
. .
.

I am not trying to encourage the theft of intellectual property; that
is just plain wrong. However it could be that the people who were
feeling guilty in fact, by accident, did not violate any laws.

Regards

John Stanton
You don't actually have to violate any laws yourself to be in a position
of
supporting those who do. I bought an estate with hundreds of original Tek
manuals in it and dozens of copies. After thinking about it, I decided it
would not be ethical for me to sell the copies and withdrew any offers I
had
made to sell them. I didn't even do the copying . . .

Stan
w7ni@easystreet.com





To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
TekScopes-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



Stan or Patricia Griffiths <w7ni@...>
 

Hi John,

Could be he is confusing Trademarks and copyrights. I am certainly not a
patent, trademark, or copyright attorney. I just learned yesterday that an old
friend of mine has just been promoted to a VP level at Tek. I need to phone him
and congratulate him on that and invite him over to view my collection. While
we are doing that, I will let him in on the problem of old Tek documentation and
he can see why we all need it. Just maybe he can help. I am not sure exactly
WHAT he is Vice President of at Tek. Tek has a LOT of Vice Presidents . . . He
may be the guy to write to. Let me give that some thought. This is definitely
worth some effort even if it only gets permission for my possible "competitors"
to do the copying and not me. (I don't really have any competitors since I
don't do any copying . . . yet.)

Stan
w7ni@easystreet.com

John Miles wrote:

I think what's happening here is that John is confusing copyrights with
trademarks. Trademarks do have to be defended actively and vigorously to
remain valid -- this is why Coca-Cola sends people into restaurants to
determine if the restaurant is serving Pepsi in response to requests for
"Coke." Xerox is another common example -- they become quite perturbed at
people who refer to photocopiers in general as "Xerox machines." Both these
companies are trying to keep their trade names out of the public domain, a
fate which befell the original manufacturers of products such as aspirin and
formica.

I believe that patents and copyrights, as Stan says, can be asserted
selectively, or not at all, and still remain valid. Anyone who's been
following the sordid Rambus story can attest to the evils of "submarine"
patents that are kept undisclosed for years and then sprung onto a hapless
competitor the minute there's money to be made.

In agreement with Stan, I don't think those who distribute copies of
copyrighted manuals have a leg to stand on, legally speaking. I wonder if
you (Stan) would have any suggestions as to whom at Tektronix we should be
addressing our requests? I wouldn't mind sending a brief letter proposing
(for example):

- Tek releases its copyright interests in operating and service manuals for
instruments for which it no longer provides parts, manuals, or support
(perhaps after a certain blackout period, say 7-10 years for instruments
that were disowned 5 years after production ended)
- Tek releases its copyright interests in the Circuit Concepts series, due
to its technical obsolescence and historical interest
- Failing that, Tek transfers copyright interest to a reputable third party
(such as Bill and Stan's site) that has already been shown to be a valuable
resource for Tek's customers.

The trick would be to keep the letter from sounding like a one-sided plea
for a bunch of free stuff. It should be possible to convince Tek management
that community support for obsolete instruments adds real value to their
existing customer relationships. (This may be an uphill fight since, for
instance, a 5-year-old spectrum analyzer is 95% as good as a brand-new one
in many respects. Hopefully they can be persuaded that their goals of
"planned obsolescence" are adequately met by cutting off the spare-parts
supply.)

Even though it would not be addressed to the customer service department,
such a letter should certainly be cc:'ed to them. I'm sure the
phone-support people would love to be able to tell customers something
besides "Get lost" when they receive calls for obsolete manuals or tech
support. They could be useful internal allies.

Any names and addresses in mind? I would be glad to volunteer to put some
time into this, posting drafts on this list for review, if we could get Bill
and Stan and, ideally, Deane to sign the letter once everyone is satisfied
with the wording.

-- jm

----- Original Message -----
From: "Stan or Patricia Griffiths" <w7ni@easystreet.com>
To: <TekScopes@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2001 10:01 PM
Subject: Re: [TekScopes] Re: copyright issues...

HiJohn,

I appreciate your opinions and you are certainly entitled to them. I have
inserted some comments below and I solicit your additional comments to
support your position. Read on and respond, please:

jstanton@viacognis.com wrote:

I think Stan is way off line here. First of all you need to know
something about copyright law, which we have had to understand since
our income is from our intellectual property (software and manuals).
I agree which is why I consulted an attorney on this subject and intend to
consult yet another attorney employed by the Tektronix Legal Department.

Copyright must be maintained by the holder, and if the holder is
disinterested in enforcing their copyright, they lose it. For
example if Tektronix has not assiduously protected their copyright on
old manuals they probably no longer have a copyright and the manuals
can be copied with impunity.
It sounds to me like you are not sure about how long copyrights are
automatically valid and that you should do some of this research on the
copyright laws and share some legal opinions here with us instead of
"guessing" about it.

From a legal perspective their well-
known failure to prosecute vendors of copies weakens and possibly
invalidates their copyright.
"Possibly" . . . and possibly not . . .

One might contact them and seek to
negotiate a per-copy royalty as an objective test of their interest
in protecting copyright before distributing copies.
My several contacts with Tektronix on this subject have never indicated
they
would actually grant me permission under any circumstances. All they ever
said was that they would "consider it" and then they fell silent on the
subject.

ou should also note that a copyright does not last forever.
That's true but I indicated in another email to this group that for
materials
copyrighted before 1964 and possibly before that, the attorney I consulted
told me they were still valid today and well into the next couple of
decades.

Wm
Shakespeare's descendants dont get royalties and "Old Gold" radio
station format is so popular because they play music that is out of
copyright and save on royalties.

As for shameful behaviour, Tek certainly qualifies. When I compare
the level of support we get from IBM on our old IBM equipment Tek
fails badly. IBM keeps documentation on line as a service for their
customers and as a demonstration that they can be trusted as a long-
term vendor (up until recently the FAA was using IBM 360 machines
from the 1960's!). Hewlett-Packard is also good at maintaining
support for its legacy products.
Irrelevant.

I would not be surprised if a group offered to supply Tek
documentation on line that Tek would very readily agree since it
would permit them to deliver better customer support at no cost to
themselves.
I would be darned surprised !

I have placed some Tek manuals into PDF format by OCRing the text and
scanning the schematics at high resolution. They look very nice when
printed on high quality paper using our Tektronix Phaser 850 color
printer and comb-bound. I have only done it so far for damaged or
mutilated manuals that I own - certainly no copyright violation. I
could probably make them available on our web site for a private
group, using the component of copyright law that permits you to lend
books to friends and for libraries to exist for members. The onus
would be on the viewer not to make a copy unless a legal right
existed.
There is no doubt that you can lend an original copy of a book to a
friend.
It MAY be OK to make a copy of a book for your own use. I would guess
that
lending a copy of a book to a friend is stepping over the line . . . I
will
be pretty angry if you make a copy of my book and lend it to your friends
. .
.

I am not trying to encourage the theft of intellectual property; that
is just plain wrong. However it could be that the people who were
feeling guilty in fact, by accident, did not violate any laws.

Regards

John Stanton
You don't actually have to violate any laws yourself to be in a position
of
supporting those who do. I bought an estate with hundreds of original Tek
manuals in it and dozens of copies. After thinking about it, I decided it
would not be ethical for me to sell the copies and withdrew any offers I
had
made to sell them. I didn't even do the copying . . .

Stan
w7ni@easystreet.com





To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
TekScopes-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
TekScopes-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


Ed Jacobson <enj99@...>
 

Yeah, I was having a bad hair day. But if you don't want to help me, it doesn't matter. I like to speak my mind rather that to be phony like many in this world.
<html></html>



From: Stan or Patricia Griffiths <w7ni@easystreet.com>
Reply-To: TekScopes@yahoogroups.com
To: TekScopes@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [TekScopes] Re: copyright issues...
Date: Sat, 15 Sep 2001 22:05:36 -0700

Wow, Ed. Those are pretty strong words. I certainly hope, for your sake,
that you never need to ask me for any technical assistance or parts support .
. .

Stan
w7ni@easystreet.com

Ed Jacobson wrote:

For the amount of money that they charge for scopes and documents, I
don't
give a damn about their copyrights.


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp


jstanton@...
 

Hi Stan,

I appreciate your comments, and your integrity. As the principal of
a software company whose daily bread depends upon selling our
intellectual property theft of intellectual property is a perpetual
concern and hazard.

I was only talking about copyright, not trademark.

When we incorporated our company we used a New York law firm to set
up our license agreements and advise us of how we should protect our
intellectual property. The partner in charge of the project was also
general counsel to Disney, and well versed in copyright law. Our
advice was as follows:

o Every author has an inherent copyright to their work. It is
not necessary to register the copyright to assert that right.
o You may register a copyright. This makes litigation easier
since you do not have produce evidence of ownership.
o A copyright to an individual's work remains the possession of
that individual, regardless of their employer.
o To retain a copyight you must label all copyrighted material
and make your best efforts to enforce your copyright.
o If a violator can show that you knowingly permitted copying of
your software previously then you will not be able to claim a remedy.
o Do not distribute software without a license agreement signed
by an authorized officer of the purchasing company. This agreement
is prima facie evidence that you are protecting your copyright.

We were advised that if we were lax in policing our software
copyright we would not be able to enforce it. Next the lawyers
encouraged us to present them with details of any violation,
particularly from companies with "deep pockets" and they would go
after them on a contingency basis. In fact they said that we and
they would profit mightily if we were to protect our copyright
adequately and uncover a prosperous violator.

The point I was making, with a certain amount of "obiter dicta" was
that the copiers of Tek manuals were possibly wringing their hands
unecessarily. My concern was not with the morality of the situation
but rather whether the copiers are in legal jeopardy. I doubt that
they are. That being said do nobody with anything to lose should
risk copyright violations. The consequences can be severe. Just
recently we had a car rental company that had inadvertently violated
our copyright when they sold off a subsidiary. Once had been made
aware of the situation their legal department, being well aware of
the hazards, moved like lightning to do whatever they had to do to
get legal and avoid prosecution (they paid $$$).

Although Tek would not be able to claim a remedy for lost sales for
something they no longer sell, punitive damages could be applied.

We have had subsequent copyright issues that we have had to resolve.
We were assisted by the intellectual property department of Baker &
Mackenzie, the worlds largest law practice (based in Chicago but in
most major cities around the world). Generally the license agreement
had provisions that went beyond copyright and these provisions were
the ones which precluded copying, not the copyright. I could
recommend these people for any intellectual property issue resolution
or advice. They also send out a monthly newsletter on domestic and
international intellectual property matters which is quite
educational (how do you protect your rights in Brazil? - charge
enough for one copy as you would expect to get from the entire
country because that is all you are going to get).

Stan I endorse your comments about the old equipment we collect and
use. Carefully conceived and built equipment with complete service
and operational documentation does not belong in a landfill!

A final comment on something different -
-- Flight 93 fought back, now its our turn --

Regards

John Stanton

--- In TekScopes@y..., Stan or Patricia Griffiths <w7ni@e...> wrote:
HiJohn,

I appreciate your opinions and you are certainly entitled to them.
I have
inserted some comments below and I solicit your additional comments
to
support your position. Read on and respond, please:

jstanton@v... wrote:

I think Stan is way off line here. First of all you need to know
something about copyright law, which we have had to understand
since
our income is from our intellectual property (software and
manuals).

I agree which is why I consulted an attorney on this subject and
intend to
consult yet another attorney employed by the Tektronix Legal
Department.

Copyright must be maintained by the holder, and if the holder is
disinterested in enforcing their copyright, they lose it. For
example if Tektronix has not assiduously protected their
copyright on
old manuals they probably no longer have a copyright and the
manuals
can be copied with impunity.
It sounds to me like you are not sure about how long copyrights are
automatically valid and that you should do some of this research on
the
copyright laws and share some legal opinions here with us instead of
"guessing" about it.

From a legal perspective their well-
known failure to prosecute vendors of copies weakens and possibly
invalidates their copyright.
"Possibly" . . . and possibly not . . .

One might contact them and seek to
negotiate a per-copy royalty as an objective test of their
interest
in protecting copyright before distributing copies.
My several contacts with Tektronix on this subject have never
indicated they
would actually grant me permission under any circumstances. All
they ever
said was that they would "consider it" and then they fell silent on
the
subject.

ou should also note that a copyright does not last forever.
That's true but I indicated in another email to this group that for
materials
copyrighted before 1964 and possibly before that, the attorney I
consulted
told me they were still valid today and well into the next couple
of decades.

Wm
Shakespeare's descendants dont get royalties and "Old Gold" radio
station format is so popular because they play music that is out
of
copyright and save on royalties.

As for shameful behaviour, Tek certainly qualifies. When I
compare
the level of support we get from IBM on our old IBM equipment Tek
fails badly. IBM keeps documentation on line as a service for
their
customers and as a demonstration that they can be trusted as a
long-
term vendor (up until recently the FAA was using IBM 360 machines
from the 1960's!). Hewlett-Packard is also good at maintaining
support for its legacy products.
Irrelevant.

I would not be surprised if a group offered to supply Tek
documentation on line that Tek would very readily agree since it
would permit them to deliver better customer support at no cost to
themselves.
I would be darned surprised !

I have placed some Tek manuals into PDF format by OCRing the text
and
scanning the schematics at high resolution. They look very nice
when
printed on high quality paper using our Tektronix Phaser 850 color
printer and comb-bound. I have only done it so far for damaged or
mutilated manuals that I own - certainly no copyright violation.
I
could probably make them available on our web site for a private
group, using the component of copyright law that permits you to
lend
books to friends and for libraries to exist for members. The onus
would be on the viewer not to make a copy unless a legal right
existed.
There is no doubt that you can lend an original copy of a book to a
friend.
It MAY be OK to make a copy of a book for your own use. I would
guess that
lending a copy of a book to a friend is stepping over the
line . . . I will
be pretty angry if you make a copy of my book and lend it to your
friends . .
.

I am not trying to encourage the theft of intellectual property;
that
is just plain wrong. However it could be that the people who were
feeling guilty in fact, by accident, did not violate any laws.

Regards

John Stanton
You don't actually have to violate any laws yourself to be in a
position of
supporting those who do. I bought an estate with hundreds of
original Tek
manuals in it and dozens of copies. After thinking about it, I
decided it
would not be ethical for me to sell the copies and withdrew any
offers I had
made to sell them. I didn't even do the copying . . .

Stan
w7ni@e...


Miroslav Pokorni <mpokorni@...>
 

Stan,

It came as quite surprise to me that rot set in into Tektronix during 80s. I
always thought that mid 90s brought that in, but then I am slow to see
trends, or I was indulging in wishful thinking.

Regards

Miroslav Pokorni

-----Original Message-----
From: Stan or Patricia Griffiths
[mailto:w7ni@easystreet.com]
Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2001 6:45 PM
To: TekScopes@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [TekScopes] Re: copyright issues...

Hi John,

I am pretty familiar with how Tektronix has behaved toward
supporting some of
their equipment in the last two decades or so. I spent a
total of 26.5 years of
my life on Tek's payroll and, finally, in late 1989, got so
disturbed by what I
saw happening inside of Tektronix that I resigned my job as
their Spectrum
Analyzer Sales Engineer in the Pacific Northwest. Believe
me, this was not an
easy move for me. I seriously thought I would NEVER leave
Tek. I was wrong.

I still have many very fond memories of life at Tektronix in
the 60's and 70's
and that is the part of Tek's history that I enjoy reliving
with my old
collection.

Still, they own that documented material and have refused to
let me have it. I
am just not willing to steal it from them.

How about a letter campaign to get Tek to let up on burying
that copyrighted
material?

Stan
w7ni@easystreet.com

John Miles wrote:

> No offense or disrespect to Stan, certainly, but I tend
towards Michael's
> point of view on this. If Tek wants to preserve the
"right" to "copy" their
> literature, they can darned well "copy" it themselves and
offer it for
> sale... at which point I'll be first in line with my
credit card.
>
> Tek's behavior of late has been nothing short of shameful.
They had no
> qualms about selling a $50,000 spectrum analyzer in 1994,
but they'll tell
> you to find a short pier and take a long walk if you call
them after 1999
> asking to buy manuals and parts for your instrument.
>
> My somewhat-anarchic take on the matter is, if Tek won't
step up to the
> plate and support their products for a reasonable length
of time, then they
> don't have much of a moral right to complain when their
customers do what's
> necessary to take support into their own hands.
>
> Is violation of copyright "right"? Of course not; I make
my living from
> intellectual property and I'm the last guy who wants to
see lawlessness in
> this area. But then, I wouldn't leave my customers in the
lurch after 5
> years, either. I can, and do, take support calls from
people who bought
> software -- software!! -- from me six or seven years ago.
Tek can either do
> the same with their high-end hardware, or they can get
used to the
> consequences.
>
> (Of course, this is all a moot point nowadays, as I
discovered when I bought
> the $100 service manual for my TDS3034 and received a few
pages telling me
> how to take the back cover off.)
>
> -- jm




------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
TekScopes-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


Stan or Patricia Griffiths <w7ni@...>
 

It started when Tek discontinued "free coffee" for employees and went downhill
from there . . .

Stan
w7ni@easystreet.com

Miroslav Pokorni wrote:

Stan,

It came as quite surprise to me that rot set in into Tektronix during 80s. I
always thought that mid 90s brought that in, but then I am slow to see
trends, or I was indulging in wishful thinking.

Regards

Miroslav Pokorni

-----Original Message-----
From: Stan or Patricia Griffiths
[mailto:w7ni@easystreet.com]
Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2001 6:45 PM
To: TekScopes@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [TekScopes] Re: copyright issues...

Hi John,

I am pretty familiar with how Tektronix has behaved toward
supporting some of
their equipment in the last two decades or so. I spent a
total of 26.5 years of
my life on Tek's payroll and, finally, in late 1989, got so
disturbed by what I
saw happening inside of Tektronix that I resigned my job as
their Spectrum
Analyzer Sales Engineer in the Pacific Northwest. Believe
me, this was not an
easy move for me. I seriously thought I would NEVER leave
Tek. I was wrong.

I still have many very fond memories of life at Tektronix in
the 60's and 70's
and that is the part of Tek's history that I enjoy reliving
with my old
collection.

Still, they own that documented material and have refused to
let me have it. I
am just not willing to steal it from them.

How about a letter campaign to get Tek to let up on burying
that copyrighted
material?

Stan
w7ni@easystreet.com

John Miles wrote:

> No offense or disrespect to Stan, certainly, but I tend
towards Michael's
> point of view on this. If Tek wants to preserve the
"right" to "copy" their
> literature, they can darned well "copy" it themselves and
offer it for
> sale... at which point I'll be first in line with my
credit card.
>
> Tek's behavior of late has been nothing short of shameful.
They had no
> qualms about selling a $50,000 spectrum analyzer in 1994,
but they'll tell
> you to find a short pier and take a long walk if you call
them after 1999
> asking to buy manuals and parts for your instrument.
>
> My somewhat-anarchic take on the matter is, if Tek won't
step up to the
> plate and support their products for a reasonable length
of time, then they
> don't have much of a moral right to complain when their
customers do what's
> necessary to take support into their own hands.
>
> Is violation of copyright "right"? Of course not; I make
my living from
> intellectual property and I'm the last guy who wants to
see lawlessness in
> this area. But then, I wouldn't leave my customers in the
lurch after 5
> years, either. I can, and do, take support calls from
people who bought
> software -- software!! -- from me six or seven years ago.
Tek can either do
> the same with their high-end hardware, or they can get
used to the
> consequences.
>
> (Of course, this is all a moot point nowadays, as I
discovered when I bought
> the $100 service manual for my TDS3034 and received a few
pages telling me
> how to take the back cover off.)
>
> -- jm

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
TekScopes-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/





To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
TekScopes-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


Miroslav Pokorni <mpokorni@...>
 

I guess, cutting out 'free coffee' is more of a symptom of decline and from
there it is downhill all the way. I have been with company that tried to
disguise that it was on the skids, i.e. free coffee continued but there were
other 'cost cutting measures'.


Regards

Miroslav Pokorni

-----Original Message-----
From: Stan or Patricia Griffiths
[mailto:w7ni@easystreet.com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2001 2:34 AM
To: TekScopes@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [TekScopes] Re: copyright issues...

It started when Tek discontinued "free coffee" for employees
and went downhill
from there . . .

Stan
w7ni@easystreet.com

Miroslav Pokorni wrote:

> Stan,
>
> It came as quite surprise to me that rot set in into
Tektronix during 80s. I
> always thought that mid 90s brought that in, but then I am
slow to see
> trends, or I was indulging in wishful thinking.
>
> Regards
>
> Miroslav Pokorni
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stan or Patricia Griffiths
> [mailto:w7ni@easystreet.com]
> Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2001 6:45
PM
> To: TekScopes@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [TekScopes] Re:
copyright issues...
>
> Hi John,
>
> I am pretty familiar with how Tektronix
has behaved toward
> supporting some of
> their equipment in the last two decades or
so. I spent a
> total of 26.5 years of
> my life on Tek's payroll and, finally, in
late 1989, got so
> disturbed by what I
> saw happening inside of Tektronix that I
resigned my job as
> their Spectrum
> Analyzer Sales Engineer in the Pacific
Northwest. Believe
> me, this was not an
> easy move for me. I seriously thought I
would NEVER leave
> Tek. I was wrong.
>
> I still have many very fond memories of
life at Tektronix in
> the 60's and 70's
> and that is the part of Tek's history that
I enjoy reliving
> with my old
> collection.
>
> Still, they own that documented material
and have refused to
> let me have it. I
> am just not willing to steal it from them.
>
> How about a letter campaign to get Tek to
let up on burying
> that copyrighted
> material?
>
> Stan
> w7ni@easystreet.com
>
> John Miles wrote:
>
> > No offense or disrespect to Stan,
certainly, but I tend
> towards Michael's
> > point of view on this. If Tek wants to
preserve the
> "right" to "copy" their
> > literature, they can darned well "copy"
it themselves and
> offer it for
> > sale... at which point I'll be first in
line with my
> credit card.
> >
> > Tek's behavior of late has been nothing
short of shameful.
> They had no
> > qualms about selling a $50,000 spectrum
analyzer in 1994,
> but they'll tell
> > you to find a short pier and take a long
walk if you call
> them after 1999
> > asking to buy manuals and parts for your
instrument.
> >
> > My somewhat-anarchic take on the matter
is, if Tek won't
> step up to the
> > plate and support their products for a
reasonable length
> of time, then they
> > don't have much of a moral right to
complain when their
> customers do what's
> > necessary to take support into their own
hands.
> >
> > Is violation of copyright "right"? Of
course not; I make
> my living from
> > intellectual property and I'm the last
guy who wants to
> see lawlessness in
> > this area. But then, I wouldn't leave
my customers in the
> lurch after 5
> > years, either. I can, and do, take
support calls from
> people who bought
> > software -- software!! -- from me six or
seven years ago.
> Tek can either do
> > the same with their high-end hardware,
or they can get
> used to the
> > consequences.
> >
> > (Of course, this is all a moot point
nowadays, as I
> discovered when I bought
> > the $100 service manual for my TDS3034
and received a few
> pages telling me
> > how to take the back cover off.)
> >
> > -- jm
>
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups
Sponsor
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an
email to:
> TekScopes-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> TekScopes-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/




------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
TekScopes-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


Doug Hale <DougHale@...>
 

I am not usually one to add any fuel to this kind of fire but this is my experience with Tek.

If they wont support us, we have to do it ourselfs.



----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Doug Hale [mailto:doughale@inet-1.com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2001 10:43 AM
To: meas-svc-us@tektronix.com <mailto:meas-svc-us@tektronix.com>
Subject: Looking for a part



I am looking for a 155-0067-02.
Whom would I contact to locate this part?

Thanks,
Doug Hale
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Mr. Hale,

Thank you for your inquiry. We have forwarded your request to our Sales
Department. You should be hearing from them soon. If you would like to
reach them directly, you may do so by calling 1-800-833-9200 option one.

If you have any other questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to
contact us.

Sincerely,

Aimee Belfiori,
Customer Service Representative
US Service Customer Support Center
Tektronix, Inc.
1-800-833-9200, Press "2" FAX: (503) 627-6260
Meas-svc-rmarequest@tek.com <mailto:Meas-svc-rmarequest@tek.com>
Instrument Service Booking:
http://www.tek.com/Measurement/Service/register/welcome.html Visit our Web Store site at: <http://catalog.tek.com/>


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Mr. Hale,

The part number you have requested pricing for is now obsolete and there is
no replacement available.

Thank you for your interest in Tektronix,

Rita Scott
E Business Account Representative

TEKTRONIX

"Enabling Innovation"

United We Stand - God Bless America




------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rita,
Thank you for your quick response to my inquiry.
Is it possible to locate some internal documentation on this part to allow me to build a discrete component
replacement?

Thanks,
Doug Hale



-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Mr. Hale,

The part number you have requested pricing for is now obsolete and there is
no replacement available.

Thank you for your interest in Tektronix,

Rita Scott
E Business Account Representative

TEKTRONIX

"Enabling Innovation"

United We Stand - God Bless America



-----Original Message-----
From: Doug Hale [ mailto:doughale@inet-1.com ] Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2001 10:43 AM
To: meas-svc-us@tektronix.com <mailto:meas-svc-us@tektronix.com>
Subject: Looking for a part


I am looking for a 155-0067-02.
Whom would I contact to locate this part?

Thanks,
Doug Hale
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Doug,

We don't have documentation available on obsolete parts.

Thank you,

Rita Scott
Tektronix Inc.