Patent violations?!

[Jules Ryckebusch]

I published the "build a ten dollar harmonic sweetener" in Electronic Musician in
1987. Technically it close enough to the Aphex Aural Exicter that they claimed it
violated there patent(s). The only thing they could claim was that it could not
be used commercially. They actually claimed that it could not be used for a
commercial recording too. I was not in any legal trouble as I was just publicly
showing how to do something, not commercial production.

Jules Ryckebusch

WeAreAs1 at aol.com wrote:

> In a message dated 5/11/00 8:47:11 AM, you wrote:
>
> <<And would I be allowed to publish a circuit to which patent rights are
>
> still active? >>
>
> I think it's OK to publish your derivative circuit.  After all, the original
> patent is in its own way a very public disclosure of the idea.  The original
> inventor takes a certain amount of risk by patenting, because the process
> actually exposes his idea to a lot more people than if he had just gone ahead
> and put his idea directly to commercial use without patenting, but kept the
> details secret.  This, indeed, is one of the several reasons Don Lancaster is
> so vehemently opposed to the use of patents (in most cases).  Anyway, as long
> as you aren't trying to make money with the derivative, I don't think you can
> get in trouble for telling people how you did it.  Keep in mind, however,
> that I learned everything I know about the law from watching Ally Mcbeal,
> Matlock, a shop-worn videotape of To Kill a Mockingbird, and last year's
> congressional hearings on Monicagate.
>
> Michael Bacich