On 24 Apr 2005 07:12:22 -0700, the renowned "Tim Shoppa"
wrote:

https://www.logsa.army.mil/etms/online.htm
I can't even access that website.

The military is screening IP addresses, trying to match them to
geographic locations, and blocking access from outside the US.

The screening isn't perfect, BTW. Sometimes real USAians cannot get to
it, sometimes foreigners can...

Tim.

Try using a proxy.


Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com

On Sun, 24 Apr 2005 00:54:41 GMT, **THE-RFI-EMI-GUY**
wrote:

Unfortunately the restriction of documentation for obsolete equipment is
a profit motive by Agilent as it promotes the planned obsolescence of
older equipment which competes with new equipment on the market.

---
And that's a fact because...?

--
John Fields
Professional Circuit Designer

On 24 Apr 2005 07:12:22 -0700, "Tim Shoppa"
wrote:

https://www.logsa.army.mil/etms/online.htm
I can't even access that website.

The military is screening IP addresses, trying to match them to
geographic locations, and blocking access from outside the US.


I can get to it from Canada (!!!). Nice screening - NOT!
No wonder we had Sept 11 happen. Oh the shame....

Stepan

Exactly my point!

John Fields wrote:

On Sun, 24 Apr 2005 00:54:41 GMT, **THE-RFI-EMI-GUY**
wrote:



Unfortunately the restriction of documentation for obsolete equipment is
a profit motive by Agilent as it promotes the planned obsolescence of
older equipment which competes with new equipment on the market.



---
And that's a fact because...?




--
Joe Leikhim K4SAT
"The RFI-EMI-GUY"

The Lost Deep Thoughts By: Jack Handey
Before a mad scientist goes mad, there's probably a time
when he's only partially mad. And this is the time when he's
going to throw his best parties.

"**THE-RFI-EMI-GUY**" wrote in message
. ..

And that's a fact because...?

Sonny Bono got the law changed before he ate a tree.
--
GW

Tim wrote:
The military is screening IP addresses, trying to match them to
geographic locations, and blocking access from outside the US.

Stepan wrote:
I can get to it from Canada (!!!). Nice screening - NOT!
No wonder we had Sept 11 happen. Oh the shame....

What? It happened because of Canadians using the internet?

Chris wrote...

I still think a lot of this discussion comes down to whether
electronics designers (who, after all, are being paid to create
intellectual property) are just trying to skate around the necessity of
paying for somebody else's intellectual property, which has admitted
value. Otherwise, why would we be having this discussion at all?

I disagree, we're not talking about manuals that can still be
purchased from HP / Agilent. (And by this I mean real manuals,
not microfiche dups that can't be used at the workbench.) We're
talking about the real shortage of manuals for old instruments,
where more manuals than instruments have been thrown away or lost.


--
Thanks,
- Win

I read in sci.electronics.design that Winfield Hill
-edu wrote (in
) about 'Copyright on HP service manuals',
on Mon, 25 Apr 2005:
We're
talking about the real shortage of manuals for old instruments,
where more manuals than instruments have been thrown away or lost.

If HP/Agilent still have these manuals but withhold all access to them,
then I think a good lawyer would find ample grounds for dissuading them
from that practice. It might be difficult to challenge them if they
offered them for USD200 each, but perhaps not impossible.
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
There are two sides to every question, except
'What is a Moebius strip?'
http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk

wrote in message
...

Gimme a stinkin' break! It's all that crap - music and movies -
that's
taking up all your space. Get rid of them! Or put them on CDs or
DVDs.

What about convenience Watson? I really *like* having everything
online and centrally accessible, instead of having to dig for it. Hey
I can even pull my stuff up at work and at other peoples homes. That's
really nice one-stop shopping! Plus if my house burns down or I get
robbed, then I can just restore a backup. I'm actually serious. It's
not that I'm just trying to get a rise out of you....

Stepan

Hey, life's a compromise. If you want the convenience, then you have to
pay for it. So pay for a couple more 250GB HDDs, and quit complaining.

"Winfield Hill" -edu wrote in
message ...
Chris wrote...

I still think a lot of this discussion comes down to whether
electronics designers (who, after all, are being paid to create
intellectual property) are just trying to skate around the necessity of
paying for somebody else's intellectual property, which has admitted
value. Otherwise, why would we be having this discussion at all?

I disagree, we're not talking about manuals that can still be
purchased from HP / Agilent. (And by this I mean real manuals,
not microfiche dups that can't be used at the workbench.) We're
talking about the real shortage of manuals for old instruments,
where more manuals than instruments have been thrown away or lost.

Right. That's how I understood it. The issue is NOT how to get things free
(or cheap) that are for sale by their rightful copyright owner. The issue
is how to deal with things that the actual owner no longer bothers to sell.

And in that kind of situation, copyright law is quite lenient when copies
are made for "private study or research" rather than resale. It is
perfectly legal for you to copy, for your own use, any HP manual you can get
your hands on. Paying other people to do the copying is a gray area.

But the underlying principle is that if HP wanted to make money off these
things, HP would offer them for sale, and HP doesn't, so HP isn't losing
anything.

Winfield Hill wrote:
Chris wrote...
I disagree, we're not talking about manuals that can still be
purchased from HP / Agilent. (And by this I mean real manuals,
not microfiche dups that can't be used at the workbench.) We're
talking about the real shortage of manuals for old instruments,
where more manuals than instruments have been thrown away or lost.


--
Thanks,
- Win

I think I've already taken up too much of your time here. If someone
told me I could have several minutes of Mr. Hill's time to talk about
electronics, I'd be absolutely delighted. But instrument manuals would
be just about the last thing in the world I'd like to talk about.

If you would indulge me anyway, I might add a few personal
observations:

* Just for my own curiosity, I looked at the Yahoo hp_instrument user
group mentioned near the beginning of this thread, and read every post
for this month. It was kind of interesting how many posts this month
involved manual .pdfs and obtaining other non-legitimate copies of HP
manuals. So I read all the posts for the HP model numbers for every HP
instrument, scope, and add-on card where there would have been a
manual. And you know what? Every HP product mentioned in this month's
posts (a few dozen items) has the _real_ OP/SV manuals available from
the same single manual reseller recommended by HP on their website --
ManualsPlus. I didn't even have to look around. But they were selling
for a price, of course.

* Over the years, I've been in several jobs where I've been the only
one who cared about instrument manual document control, and ended up
maintaining the system myself in one case. Engineers would draw and
quarter (on your side) or tar and feather (on our side) someone from
another department who treated other company- or University-owned
engineering IP like prints or purchased software with the same disdain
almost all engineers have for instrument manuals. At best, they will
squirrel them away in their own desk or lab bench so they don't have to
go to the bother of signing them out or returning them. Usually
they'll ignore and lose them or throw them out as clutter. I guess my
personal opinion on this subject is kind of rare.

* Older instruments are generally a better value, as well as usually
being easier to use and less expensive to maintain. I try to specify
used/reconditioned instruments wherever possible, because I feel
they're generally a good deal for my employer or customer. I always
buy used for myself, because that way I can afford a better instrument.
I've specified several "orphan" (manufacturer no longer provides
service or parts, including the manuals) HP instruments, and bought
one myself for my own use. Years back, I got burned by buying a tricky
instrument from another manufacturer, then blowing a project deadline
partly because I couldn't buy, beg, borrow or steal the manual, didn't
use the instrument properly and was getting bad data. Since then, I
make sure not to buy a used instrument without the manual. And while
manual availability has affected which used instrument I chose, I've
never had to buy a new instrument because I couldn't find a used one
that would do the job and that had a manual available from somewhere.

* Let's say that I walked into a job where I was required to use a
piece of existing equipment for which I had to have the manual. Let's
also say I made a good faith effort to find the manual, and couldn't
get a legal one. Would I start scrounging around for a .pdf or other
non-legitimate copy? Sure, I would. I'm not a zealot about this.
Just like everyone else, I've got to do the job, get it done on time,
and if there's no other way, I guess I'd have to clip the coin. But
there's almost always a legal way to do it as things are set up now,
especially for orphan HP instruments. But it _does_ cost money.

* I would also concede it's likely there are many more orphaned HP
instruments out there than there are manuals. What would happen if
more engineers took the copyright law seriously as it relates to
instrument manuals? Well, first off, I suppose existing inventory on
manuals would go down and prices might go up a bit. Not as much as you
might think, because as prices go up, new instruments and other used
instruments with manuals become more attractive options. As demand
increased, suppliers would institute waiting lists, and since they
would be guaranteed fast turnaround, they would loosen their
restrictions on purchasing individual manuals, and pay more for them
(currently most of these manual resellers are miserly, and will only
buy manuals by the bale and "pay" by the ton ;-). Possibly owners of
manuals without instruments would register their copies with resellers
in case someone wanted them. More manuals would crawl out of the
woodwork as useless paper turns into potential cash. Manuals might be
rented, or offered on consignment. Engineers might even form a co-op
to rent or to minimize brokers' fees (the markup on these manuals is
extravagant). And eventually a new balance would be achieved. The new
price of the manuals would more accurately reflect their real value. I
don't think the price would be that much more than it is now, though.
And at that point, if manuals were still printed on unobtainium, we
would all have a legitimate beef against Agilent and the other
manufacturers, and I think they might then be more inclined to offer
either "book-on-demand" or high-quality Xeroxed copies of their old
manuals for a price a little higher than the asking price for used
manuals. And engineers would start getting more serious about spending
the time and effort to maintain document control on these newly
valuable books.

Sorry to bend your ear, but it's kind of a "hot button" issue for me.
I've not found it hard to comply with the law as it now stands. I just
pay for my pleasures, which is my perogative and one of the joys of the
business world. Original manuals for nearly all orphaned HP equipment
do exist out there, and paying for them is a legitimate cost. Of
course the copyright law is messed up, especially in the States. 75 to
95 years is too long for a corporation to own a copyright on anything.
But out of direct respect for the law, and indirectly out of respect
for the creator of the book, I'll try to buy the manual if it's legally
available.

Thanks again for your time.

TAANSTAAFL
Chris

A few observations:

1. Copyright is supposed to help an author receive just compensation
for his/her/its work.

2. Although much work obviously went into the manuals for
non-supported equipment, Agilent is no longer receiving significant
compensation for them - as far as I know.

3. So Agilent is correct as far as the letter of the law, but may not
really be correct as far as the intention of the law. But the letter
is the ruling rule.

4. Tektronix has publically released all copyrights on all their
manuals for equipment which they no longer support. (ONLY the
equipment they no longer support.) This has been a great boon for
hobbists, students, and probably some academic institutions. Maybe
even some of the many small start-up companies that find 25-30 year old
Tek scopes still are useful.

5. Both Agilent and Tektronix are completely within their legal
rights. But Tektronix has opted to be generous to the user community
of their older machines. This is a community of hobbyists, students,
academic institutions, and so on. The same community that Apple found
it cost effective to donate large numbers of computers to.

Release of copyright may cost Tek a few sales of newer machines, but
gains them a lot of respect. The value of the public relations almost
certainly is many times the small loss of potential sales.

I'm sorry to read that Agilent is not so forward thinking. Sounds like
they took their cue from Disney suing day-care centers for using
"Donald Duck" (r) (c) (tm) (etc.) in wall murals.

Ahh, well, the modern corporate mind.

-Howard

Howard - HedgeWarden wrote...

A few observations:

1. Copyright is supposed to help an author receive just compensation
for his/her/its work.

2. Although much work obviously went into the manuals for
non-supported equipment, Agilent is no longer receiving significant
compensation for them - as far as I know.

3. So Agilent is correct as far as the letter of the law, but may not
really be correct as far as the intention of the law. But the letter
is the ruling rule.

4. Tektronix has publically released all copyrights on all their
manuals for equipment which they no longer support. (ONLY the
equipment they no longer support.) This has been a great boon for
hobbists, students, and probably some academic institutions. Maybe
even some of the many small start-up companies that find 25-30 year
old Tek scopes still are useful.

5. Both Agilent and Tektronix are completely within their legal
rights. But Tektronix has opted to be generous to the user community
of their older machines. This is a community of hobbyists, students,
academic institutions, and so on. The same community that Apple found
it cost effective to donate large numbers of computers to.

Release of copyright may cost Tek a few sales of newer machines, but
gains them a lot of respect. The value of the public relations almost
certainly is many times the small loss of potential sales.

I'm sorry to read that Agilent is not so forward thinking. Sounds
like they took their cue from Disney suing day-care centers for using
"Donald Duck" (r) (c) (tm) (etc.) in wall murals.

Hear, Hear!

Ahh, well, the modern corporate mind.

Indeed.


--
Thanks,
- Win

The man who apparently convinced Tektronix to release their manuals to
the public domain, David Hopkins, has left a message on yahoo groups
offering the help of his experience...

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hp_agi...t/message/1129

Note also, that for HP to release these manuals to the public domain,
would be an act of charity towards third-world and developing nations,
where used test equipment can be of great service. I hope that someone
with inside knowledge of Agilent management can take this forward...

Stepan

Dave wrote:
I don't have any HP user or service manuals, but I suspect they are
copyrighted. Has anyone ever asked Agilent for permission to copy an HP
manual and put it on the web.

I asked Agilent as was refused permission to put copies on the web.

BUT they said they can grant me permission to distribute (charging if I
wish) copies of manuals for obsolete equipment on CD or paper - but not
the web.

I was sent a short half-page letter, asked to fill it in, sign it, send
it back and are awaiting confirmation of permission by email.

So it is not as bad as it seems.

So anyone selling CDs on eBay can do it legally if they ask permission
first - I doubt many do.

Dave wrote:

Dave wrote:
I don't have any HP user or service manuals, but I suspect they are
copyrighted. Has anyone ever asked Agilent for permission to copy an HP
manual and put it on the web.

I asked Agilent as was refused permission to put copies on the web.

BUT they said they can grant me permission to distribute (charging if I
wish) copies of manuals for obsolete equipment on CD or paper - but not
the web.

I was sent a short half-page letter, asked to fill it in, sign it, send
it back and are awaiting confirmation of permission by email.

So it is not as bad as it seems.

So anyone selling CDs on eBay can do it legally if they ask permission
first - I doubt many do.


Did they say if you could list the files you have on a website so you
can sell or trade CDROMs?

--
Former professional electron wrangler.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida

I don't think you'd have a problem with HP allowing you to have the manual
for your equipment maintenance. Publishing it on the web is rather
a stretch though.

b.

On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 22:08:49 -0500, Leonard Martin
wrote:

Well, how nice for you that you function in a world where $75 for a
manual is small change! There are lots of us hobbyists out here who like
to experiment with electronics but who might find that to be their "mad"
money for a month. Somehow, as one of them, I'm not convinced by your
"all us well-off businessmen should be good t each other" argument.


The last "new" price for a 5370B was over $30K, hardly hobbyist turf.
A decent used one can cost from a few hundred dollars (ebay, as-is) to
a couple of thousand (guaranteed, calibrated from a broker.) $75 ain't
bad in this context.


This kind of stuff is part of a trend that's been going on, to my
amazement, for a couple of decades now. It might be summed up as
"Business is more important than anything. The market is God. Whatever's
good for either is great, and the devil take the rest!" Under this
regime each new enormity perpetrated by some business, like this one by
Aligent (or the copyright extension that business got away with a while
ago) first causes a bit of squirming on the part of the victims, but
then other virtuous souls remind them of the three divine maxims set out
above, and everyone then naturally knuckles under.

How did a once-free, and in fact instinctively rebellious, people come
to this?

Leonard


Once free? What you are complaining about is precisely freedom. If you
don't like Agilent equipment, or their policies towards their
intellectual property, buy something else, or build your own. If you
don't like paying somebody for their book or their music, write your
own.

John

I read in sci.electronics.design that Leonard Martin
wrote (in
) about
'Copyright on HP service manuals', on Wed, 27 Apr 2005:

How did a once-free, and in fact instinctively rebellious, people come
to this?

You didn't eat up all your broccoli when Mom told you to.
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
There are two sides to every question, except
'What is a Moebius strip?'
http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk

On Thu, 28 Apr 2005 07:31:07 +0100, John Woodgate
wrote:

I read in sci.electronics.design that Leonard Martin
wrote (in
) about
'Copyright on HP service manuals', on Wed, 27 Apr 2005:

How did a once-free, and in fact instinctively rebellious, people come
to this?

You didn't eat up all your broccoli when Mom told you to.

My favorite US Presidential quote is from George Bush I:

"I am the President of the United States of America, and I will not
eat broccoli."

John

In article ,
says...
On Thu, 28 Apr 2005 07:31:07 +0100, John Woodgate
wrote:

I read in sci.electronics.design that Leonard Martin
wrote (in
) about
'Copyright on HP service manuals', on Wed, 27 Apr 2005:

How did a once-free, and in fact instinctively rebellious, people come
to this?

You didn't eat up all your broccoli when Mom told you to.

My favorite US Presidential quote is from George Bush I:

"I am the President of the United States of America, and I will not
eat broccoli."

Close (mine too, BTW).


"I do not like broccoli. And I haven't liked it since I was a
little kid and my mother made me eat it. And I'm President of
the United States and I'm not going to eat any more broccoli."
George H. W. Bush

--
Keith

I read in sci.electronics.design that John Larkin
wrote (in
) about 'Copyright on HP
service manuals', on Thu, 28 Apr 2005:

"I am the President of the United States of America, and I will not eat
broccoli."

Unlike Emperor Franz Ferdinand, 'I am the Emperor and I want
DUMPLINGS!'.

GB probably remembers his childhood aversion. To me, it taste quite
different now, 60 years later. And the costly 'purple sprouting' version
is even (much) better, whereas I couldn't stand it at 8 years of age.

Mind you, I steam it for 8 minutes or microwave with water for 2 - 3
minutes, whereas my mother used to boil it for 15 minutes, and that
makes quite a lot of difference.
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
There are two sides to every question, except
'What is a Moebius strip?'
http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk

On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 22:08:49 -0500, Leonard Martin wrote:

This kind of stuff is part of a trend that's been going on, to my
amazement, for a couple of decades now. It might be summed up as
"Business is more important than anything. The market is God. Whatever's
good for either is great, and the devil take the rest!" Under this
regime each new enormity perpetrated by some business, like this one by
Aligent (or the copyright extension that business got away with a while
ago) first causes a bit of squirming on the part of the victims, but
then other virtuous souls remind them of the three divine maxims set out
above, and everyone then naturally knuckles under.

How did a once-free, and in fact instinctively rebellious, people come
to this?

"The shadow of Love is Power. Love first gave much of his Power to
Lucifer. And then over time he denied the rest of his Power, handing it
to Ahriman.

"Love, real Love feels much better than Power... yet most humans have
chosen to worship the god of Power, not the God of Love. Praised from the
pulpits and beseeched in the deepest prayers for relief from pain and
oppression, the god of Power has been very popular.

"Power has constantly affirmed that he and only he is God. And he has
been very successful at this... many beings have never even known that
the God of Love exists."
- Heart: http://www.godchannel.com/lovepower.html

But I have it on Good Authority that this is changing, even as we speak.
--
Love,
Rich

for further information, please visit http://www.godchannel.com

On Thu, 28 Apr 2005 15:35:44 GMT, Rich The Philosophizer
wrote:

On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 22:08:49 -0500, Leonard Martin wrote:

This kind of stuff is part of a trend that's been going on, to my
amazement, for a couple of decades now. It might be summed up as
"Business is more important than anything. The market is God. Whatever's
good for either is great, and the devil take the rest!" Under this
regime each new enormity perpetrated by some business, like this one by
Aligent (or the copyright extension that business got away with a while
ago) first causes a bit of squirming on the part of the victims, but
then other virtuous souls remind them of the three divine maxims set out
above, and everyone then naturally knuckles under.

How did a once-free, and in fact instinctively rebellious, people come
to this?

"The shadow of Love is Power. Love first gave much of his Power to
Lucifer. And then over time he denied the rest of his Power, handing it
to Ahriman.

"Love, real Love feels much better than Power... yet most humans have
chosen to worship the god of Power, not the God of Love. Praised from the
pulpits and beseeched in the deepest prayers for relief from pain and
oppression, the god of Power has been very popular.

"Power has constantly affirmed that he and only he is God. And he has
been very successful at this... many beings have never even known that
the God of Love exists."
- Heart: http://www.godchannel.com/lovepower.html

But I have it on Good Authority that this is changing, even as we speak.

You really mean "even as we cut and paste."

John

On Thu, 28 Apr 2005 16:24:17 +0100, the renowned John Woodgate
wrote:

I read in sci.electronics.design that John Larkin
wrote (in
) about 'Copyright on HP
service manuals', on Thu, 28 Apr 2005:

"I am the President of the United States of America, and I will not eat
broccoli."

Unlike Emperor Franz Ferdinand, 'I am the Emperor and I want
DUMPLINGS!'.

GB probably remembers his childhood aversion. To me, it taste quite
different now, 60 years later. And the costly 'purple sprouting' version
is even (much) better, whereas I couldn't stand it at 8 years of age.

Mind you, I steam it for 8 minutes or microwave with water for 2 - 3
minutes, whereas my mother used to boil it for 15 minutes, and that
makes quite a lot of difference.

Yes, it does!


Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com

On Thu, 28 Apr 2005 16:24:17 +0100, John Woodgate
wrote:

I read in sci.electronics.design that John Larkin
wrote (in
) about 'Copyright on HP
service manuals', on Thu, 28 Apr 2005:

"I am the President of the United States of America, and I will not eat
broccoli."

Unlike Emperor Franz Ferdinand, 'I am the Emperor and I want
DUMPLINGS!'.

GB probably remembers his childhood aversion. To me, it taste quite
different now, 60 years later. And the costly 'purple sprouting' version
is even (much) better, whereas I couldn't stand it at 8 years of age.

Mind you, I steam it for 8 minutes or microwave with water for 2 - 3
minutes, whereas my mother used to boil it for 15 minutes, and that
makes quite a lot of difference.

Sometimes we get (at restaurants) the Italian broccolinni stuff or
whatever; it's small, bitter, and awful.

I thing there's been a lot of selective breeding going on lately [1].
The last batch we had at home was *sweet*.

John

[1] riffs are obvious. Go for it.

In article ,
John Woodgate wrote:

GB probably remembers his childhood aversion. To me, it taste quite
different now, 60 years later. And the costly 'purple sprouting' version
is even (much) better, whereas I couldn't stand it at 8 years of age.

Mind you, I steam it for 8 minutes or microwave with water for 2 - 3
minutes, whereas my mother used to boil it for 15 minutes, and that
makes quite a lot of difference.

Bingo! I learned to hate most vegetables, early on, due to the way
they were cooked... boiled until limp and tasteless, reduced to a
nondescript shade of greenish-brown.

I still hate 'em when they're prepared in that fashion. Don't even
get me started on one of the greatest culinary crimes ever invented:
canned green peas.

On the other hand, the very same vegetables, prepared as John
suggests, or briefly stir-fried with a drop of good oil and a smidge
of garlic, are one of nature's perfect foods... yummy!

Some of us learn the benefits of new approaches as we grow older. It
sounds as if GHB didn't. His loss.

--
Dave Platt AE6EO
Hosting the Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior
I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will
boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads!

Leonard Martin wrote:

Well, how nice for you that you function in a world where $75 for a
manual is small change! There are lots of us hobbyists out here who
like
to experiment with electronics but who might find that to be their
"mad"
money for a month. Somehow, as one of them, I'm not convinced by your

"all us well-off businessmen should be good t each other" argument.

This kind of stuff is part of a trend that's been going on, to my
amazement, for a couple of decades now. It might be summed up as
"Business is more important than anything. The market is God.
Whatever's
good for either is great, and the devil take the rest!" Under this
regime each new enormity perpetrated by some business, like this one
by
Aligent (or the copyright extension that business got away with a
while
ago) first causes a bit of squirming on the part of the victims, but
then other virtuous souls remind them of the three divine maxims set
out
above, and everyone then naturally knuckles under.

How did a once-free, and in fact instinctively rebellious, people
come
to this?

Leonard

--
"Everything that rises must converge"
--Flannery O'Connor

As to your ad hominem argument about well-off businessmen all watching
each others' backs, I showed that to the War Department, and she got a
good laugh out of that one. A slightly bitter laugh, but a good one.
I expect to be called "The Well-Off Businessman" or "Bourgeoise
Capitalist" or "Moneybags Industrialist" for at least several days.
But as a matter of fact, most of the manuals I've purchased over the
years have been for employers or customers. If you compare the cost of
a new lab instrument to a used/reconditioned one, $25 to $75 is small
change. They're still way ahead. As to my own few lab quality
instruments, if I can't afford the manual I need, I can't afford the
instrument.

It's not an issue of being an acolyte of the neo-liberal economic
church of Milton Friedman and his divine maxims. It's an issue of
fairness, which usually comes from the other side of the
political/economic aisle, as do I. And it's an issue of encouraging
creativity and rewarding the creators of intellectual property for
their work. Copyright is a very American idea. Before the formation
of the United States, the King of England had the right to award
monopolies on the publication of books. This monopoly was sometimes
used to reward cronies or punish the creators of the IP by burying the
book. Look at any American History survey course textbook, and Article
I, Section 8 of our constitution, as well as the original Copyright Act
of 1790.

It's kind of funny, really. Here's a newsgroup for electronics design.
Contributors include researchers, authors, teachers and professors,
chip designers, and many really good electronic engineers who make
original contributions to the field and write for everyone's benefit in
this newsgroup, trade journals and their websites. (I don't belong in
their league. For the most part, I just try to stay out of their way
and answer simple, obvious questions so they won't have to, along with
a suggestion to post to s.e.b. next time.) I'm just happy to read
their conversations and learn from them. But one thing they all have
in common is creating intellectual property for a living. One would
think they would be willing to go to the wall for IP rights in general.
Or possibly they're just being a little short-sighted.

These are not good times for U.S. engineers in general, particularly in
manufacturing. There seems to be a disconnect in our country between
the value of a thing which is made and the value of the intelligence
behind it. Managers of manufacturing companies feel they can do it
with fewer engineers, and then are surprised when their product line
gets stale, customers complain they can't get support with their
product and will buy something else next time, disastrous manufacturing
glitches happen on the floor -- things don't work right and nobody
knows why.

In my career, I've seen good engineers creating IP and increasing the
value of the companies they worked for, far in excess of whatever
they're paid (sometimes the equivalent of years salary on one project),
then being thrown away like used coffee grounds. The current crop of
tender, green MBAs could have a notion to shoot the company in the foot
by reducing "indirect labor and overhead costs". Management may decide
they can hire a fresh fish out of school or a foreign visa applicant
for a lot less money. They might even just let an engineer go if he
gets sick. In short, they really don't value IP because they don't
value the creators of IP.

TAANSTAAFL means There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch (Robert A.
Heinlein, "The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress", one of the icons of my
misspent youth). That's been used as a motto of the Scaife, Coors and
Murdoch neoliberals at the Heritage Foundation, American Enterprise
Institute and Fox as they try to march the United States back to the
Gilded Age of the 1890s. I'm afraid Heinlein even used it himself that
way. But before the politics and the macroeconomics comes the basic
issue of paying for value received and doing what's fair. If you don't
pay an engineer for the value received from his IP he's trying to sell,
he'll stop making IP and do something profitable to support his family.
If you don't pay for the value of IP received from a coprporation, the
people whose job is making the IP will not be profitable to employ, and
will be let go. Fewer working engineers, less creativity and less IP
will mean a declining manufacturing economy. And as things go down the
drain and there are no more manufacturing jobs available, people will
just console themselves with anti-intellectual, anti-science beliefs,
following people like Ron Grossi and staring at Fox. They'll let other
countries take the lead, and they'll call it God's just punishment on a
sinful society.

So much for the big picture. I treat IP as always having value because
it does. I do it out of respect to the creators, and to maintain the
value of the IP. I also do it in order to keep from devaluing IP in
general.

Agilent isn't running around with platoons of armed library police, and
they definitely aren't buying up old manuals to keep 'em out of your
hands. I have never known of anybody who quietly copied a manual for
personal use who was busted by the legal department at HP or any
instrument manufacturer. I don't believe they really care about
manuals for orphaned instruments, except that there are several
long-term consequences to not making pro forma efforts to defend their
IP from obvious attempts to devalue it (like putting scans on the net).
Actually, I'm sure they look on this whole issue as a money and good
will loser and a general PITA. They see you acting like since it's
their fault they made these great, reliable instruments 25 years ago
that still work great today, they should be punished for it. I get the
feeling they already are, and I'm personally afraid they might be
thinking about learning from their "mistakes".

And as for me, I'll "pay for my pleasures", and have my employers and
customers pay for theirs, not so much because I can afford to light my
cigars with $100 bills as that's just the right way to do it. You
know, the right thing to do? Like, ethics and honesty and all that? I
know it seems obsolete in these times, but some of us (at least as many
Blue as Red) still feel that way.

Good luck
Chris

How does free distribution of *obsolete* manuals work against "encouraging
creativity"?

We are not attacking the concept of copyright. Many of us are saying HP
would benefit from allowing free redistribution on the Web of old manuals
for equipment that they no longer sell.

Winfield Hill wrote...

Stepan, wrote...

HP is enforcing their copyright over manuals, even for old
unsupported equipment. Look at this:

http://bama.sbc.edu/images/Letter%204-18-05.pdf

I see the BoatAnchor Manual Archive public-service site has
complied, http://bama.sbc.edu/hp.htm removing masses of valuable
documentation for ancient hp instruments from public availability.

There's good news from BAMA News, http://bama.sbc.edu/news.htm
"HP Manuals Will Return to BAMA. A license has been granted
by Agilent to allow BAMA to carry HP manuals. The HP page will
need to be recreated and the files returned to the server. This
will take a while, but they will be back! (April 28, 2005)"


--
Thanks,
- Win

Looks like HP has agreed to allow BAMA to publish. A well coined
letter to Agilent counsul was the key to open this door. Thanks to all
involved with getting this important job done. We all love surplus HP
gear!

regards
N9NEO


http://amfone.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=4565

On 29 Apr 2005 11:49:51 -0700, Winfield Hill
-edu wrote:

Winfield Hill wrote...

Stepan, wrote...

HP is enforcing their copyright over manuals, even for old
unsupported equipment. Look at this:

http://bama.sbc.edu/images/Letter%204-18-05.pdf

I see the BoatAnchor Manual Archive public-service site has
complied, http://bama.sbc.edu/hp.htm removing masses of valuable
documentation for ancient hp instruments from public availability.

There's good news from BAMA News, http://bama.sbc.edu/news.htm
"HP Manuals Will Return to BAMA. A license has been granted
by Agilent to allow BAMA to carry HP manuals. The HP page will
need to be recreated and the files returned to the server. This
will take a while, but they will be back! (April 28, 2005)"



We should download them all and burn CDs before they change their
minds!

What I really want are the schematics for the HP9100 desktop
calculator, ca 1965. I have two, both dead, and it's sad that they
won't allow anybody to get the info needed to restore these classics.

http://www.classiccmp.org/calcmuseum/HP9100.htm

http://www.science.uva.nl/faculteit/...p9100_txt.html

http://www.hpmuseum.org/tech9100.htm


It's amazing that HP actually reused the 9100 model number for some
poorly-reviewed inkjet printer/fax thing.

John

In sci.electronics.repair Dave wrote:
The manual in question (HP 5370B time interval counter) is dated 1995,
part number 05370-90031. The equipment is no longer supported.

A few observations:

- If the manual is separate from the instrument, it will get separated
from the equipment and lost. Doesn't matter if it's on paper, a CD,
a website, or whatever.

- In these latter days, memory is cheaper than dirt. Especially if
it's ROM.

- Small flash-memory drives with a USB connector are rather ubitiquous.

So... why not store the manuals INSIDE the instruments, and not have
this problem again?

Have a USB port somewhere on the instrument. Plug in a flash drive,
push a button, and get a .txt or .pdf dumped to the flash drive. A
fancy instrument could use a menu selection to dump a nice PDF from
a big ROM; an inexpensive one could use a little recessed switch on
the back panel to bit-bang a text file out the USB port with an 8051
or something. Perhaps even a serial port doing an ASCII (or Kermit
or similar) transfer for a really low-dollar solution. Instruments
fancy enough to have their own Ethernet / Web server could simply
serve documents through that interface. If they just have Ethernet
and TCP/IP, maybe a "magic packet" to a well-known port (17?) on a
non-routable IP address could trigger a manual dump via FTP.

The storage inside the instrument would need to be in ROM, or else it
will eventually get erased. If the instrument takes firmware updates,
there should be a mechanism for the updates to include addenda pages
in the manual dump, but the updates shouldn't be able to overwrite the
original manual.

This won't do a thing for all those instruments floating around out
there now. (Or maybe this has already been thought of and implemented;
I don't get to buy much brand multi-kilodollar test equipment at work.)
But if the market could agree on some kind of standard, and get the
vendors to accept it, the "missing manual" problem could be reduced
a great deal.

Matt Roberds

On Thu, 28 Apr 2005 21:06:45 -0400, mc wrote:

How does free distribution of *obsolete* manuals work against "encouraging
creativity"?

We are not attacking the concept of copyright. Many of us are saying HP
would benefit from allowing free redistribution on the Web of old manuals
for equipment that they no longer sell.

In fact you are attacking the concept of copyright. Aligent owns the
copyright and has the last say. It seems that they _have_ reversed their
position, so maybe your whining did help. ;-)

--
Keith

keith wrote...

On Thu, 28 Apr 2005 21:06:45 -0400, mc wrote:

How does free distribution of *obsolete* manuals work against "encouraging
creativity"?

We are not attacking the concept of copyright. Many of us are saying HP
would benefit from allowing free redistribution on the Web of old manuals
for equipment that they no longer sell.

In fact you are attacking the concept of copyright. Aligent owns the
copyright and has the last say. It seems that they _have_ reversed their
position, so maybe your whining did help. ;-)

I beg to differ, we did not attack Agilent's legal right to restrict the
manual information if they chose, we attacked Agilent's apparent choice
to do so. It now appears they did no more than (roughly) assert their
right to grant permission after it's sought, which we do not question.
But we do argue that it would have been unreasonable, counterproductive,
mean-minded and unfair to deprive the legitimate owners of their older
instruments the right to fully run and maintain those instruments, if
they were unfortunate enough not to own one of the rare original manuals.


--
Thanks,
- Win

mc wrote:
How does free distribution of *obsolete* manuals work against "encouraging
creativity"?

We are not attacking the concept of copyright. Many of us are saying HP
would benefit from allowing free redistribution on the Web of old manuals
for equipment that they no longer sell.



Tektronix has specifically released their copyrights on obsolete manuals.



--
Many thanks,

Don Lancaster
Synergetics 3860 West First Street Box 809 Thatcher, AZ 85552
voice: (928)428-4073 email:

Please visit my GURU's LAIR web site at http://www.tinaja.com

Winfield Hill wrote...

keith wrote...

On Thu, 28 Apr 2005 21:06:45 -0400, mc wrote:

How does free distribution of *obsolete* manuals work against "encouraging
creativity"?

We are not attacking the concept of copyright. Many of us are saying HP
would benefit from allowing free redistribution on the Web of old manuals
for equipment that they no longer sell.

In fact you are attacking the concept of copyright. Aligent owns the
copyright and has the last say. It seems that they _have_ reversed their
position, so maybe your whining did help. ;-)

I beg to differ, we did not attack Agilent's legal right to restrict the
manual information if they chose, we attacked Agilent's apparent choice
to do so. It now appears they did no more than (roughly) assert their
right to grant permission after it's sought, which we do not question.
But we do argue that it would have been unreasonable, counterproductive,
mean-minded and unfair to deprive the legitimate owners of their older
instruments the right to fully run and maintain those instruments, if
they were unfortunate enough not to own one of the rare original manuals.

I should add, that at this point, after the dust has settled, it does
not appear Agilent is in fact overly restricting the copying of their
old manuals (despite the language of their lawyer's take-down letter),
because they do grant permission when it's sought, including a type of
blanket permission, and also even including the right to charge for the
service, AFAICT. BTW, I received an email from the (former) co-leader
of HP's company-wide committee handling this issue, and this was their
economically-derived carefully-thought-out company policy six years ago,
and it would still appear to be, unless we learn otherwise.

So, it all appears to be a non-issue. Move along, nothing to see here.


--
Thanks,
- Win

"Winfield Hill" -edu wrote in
message ...
keith wrote...

On Thu, 28 Apr 2005 21:06:45 -0400, mc wrote:

How does free distribution of *obsolete* manuals work against
"encouraging
creativity"?

We are not attacking the concept of copyright. Many of us are saying HP
would benefit from allowing free redistribution on the Web of old
manuals
for equipment that they no longer sell.

In fact you are attacking the concept of copyright. Aligent owns the
copyright and has the last say. It seems that they _have_ reversed their
position, so maybe your whining did help. ;-)

I beg to differ, we did not attack Agilent's legal right to restrict the
manual information if they chose, we attacked Agilent's apparent choice
to do so.

Precisely. They have the legal right to restrict redistribution of this
stuff any way they want. However, it does not benefit them to do what they
were doing. That was everyone's point except Keith's.

"Leonard Martin" wrote in message
...
In article .com,
"Chris" wrote:

[snip]

Chris


Well, how nice for you that you function in a world where $75 for a
manual is small change! There are lots of us hobbyists out here who
like
to experiment with electronics but who might find that to be their
"mad"
money for a month. Somehow, as one of them, I'm not convinced by your
"all us well-off businessmen should be good t each other" argument.

This kind of stuff is part of a trend that's been going on, to my
amazement, for a couple of decades now. It might be summed up as
"Business is more important than anything. The market is God.
Whatever's
good for either is great, and the devil take the rest!" Under this
regime each new enormity perpetrated by some business, like this one
by
Aligent (or the copyright extension that business got away with a
while
ago) first causes a bit of squirming on the part of the victims, but
then other virtuous souls remind them of the three divine maxims set
out
above, and everyone then naturally knuckles under.

How did a once-free, and in fact instinctively rebellious, people come
to this?

It seems that to maintain civility, some loss of freedom seems to be
necessary. Like with spam and email. Taking away the ability to spam
anonymously brings complaints from those who say that will also take
away the freedom to email anonymously. Yeah, it seems so. If you want
to remain anonymous by wearing a ski mask, it'd probably make a lot of
difference on how you're treated when you walk into a 7-11.

Leonard

--

On 30 Apr 2005 12:46:00 -0700, Winfield Hill
-edu wrote:


I should add, that at this point, after the dust has settled, it does
not appear Agilent is in fact overly restricting the copying of their
old manuals (despite the language of their lawyer's take-down letter),
because they do grant permission when it's sought, including a type of
blanket permission, and also even including the right to charge for the
service, AFAICT.

---
Interesting choice of words, in that there is no "right" being
granted, it's a _privilege_, the exercising of which Agilent
apparently now allows and can curtail at any time, as it sees fit.

--
John Fields
Professional Circuit Designer