I "practice" nothing... I simply do, watch me...

Warmest regards,
John

"J. Mc Laughlin" wrote in message
...
Dear "John Smith"
Fair-use is one of the most complex parts of the law. I have studied
it
and applied it for more many years than you have been a poseur. It has
certainly caused considerable amusement among the knowledgeable people in
this group to read you suggesting that I read up on the subject.

Your pretending to practice law would only be amusing if it were not
that some reading what you write might believe you. You copy. You claim
it
is protected under the doctrine of fair-use and yet you provide no
attribution nor context that could support fair-use. That is old fashion
plagiarizing.

You then start to argue that such theft is for the good of the
recipient. All that can be said is that you must have had a mother, and
she
would be ashamed. Mac N8TT

--
J. Mc Laughlin; Michigan U.S.A.
Home:
"John Smith" wrote in message
...
Well, nice of you to worry about me copying, copyrighted work and
suffering
a penality, but let me worry about that... and MOST technical docs have
fallen to public domain QUICKLY--especially this stuff which was cutting
edge technology--when my grandfather was a boy...

There is also "fair use", you may want to read up on it... since the
drawing I pasted here is less than a page (much less) it OBIVIOUSLY would
fall under this--and I would be covered yet again...

Most importantly is the necessity to get facts and info into the hands
needing it, in a form which they can understand--in a manner which does
not
chase them off.. something I DON'T see happening here.

Warmest regards,
John
"J. Mc Laughlin" wrote in message
...
Dear "John Smith"
The probability that you copied works that were not covered by
copyright
is minuscule. For such a work not to be covered by copyright it would
have
had to be declared in the public domain by the author or publisher.

Here is a link to the Copyright Office that provides some
authoritative
information about low long copyright protection lasts:
http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ1.html#hlc

Having expressed disdain for lawyers, it is unlikely that you are a
lawyer, whatever and whoever you are. The Patent Office lists three
patent
attorneys with the name of John Smith. I doubt that you are one of
them.

When you copy works that are almost surely copyrighted and provide
no
attribution, you encourage persons with an interest in the works to
track
you down. Not wise.

Mac N8TT

--
J. Mc Laughlin; Michigan U.S.A.
Home:
"John Smith" wrote in message
...
... as a matter of fact, they are scanned from "copyright expired"
material... I took the time to bring everyone up to speed on
copyright
here... and even to know the difference between expired and not...
for
some
strange reason some have difficulty dealing with this...

He is correct about it being a voltage balun, which I believe is what
you
first asked about, at least that is what the balun you referenced
looked
like to me--I make mistakes and could have been mistaken... however,
there
is also a post from me in this thead on the current balun you can
use...
when you read my post on the quick-start on the differences for
voltage/current baluns you can decide for yourself--on what you
need...
baluns are a very simple thing, don't know why so much mystery wants
to
end
up wrapped about 'em...

Warmest regards,
John

"Ian White GM3SEK" wrote in message
...
John Smith wrote:
Here is a url to a page I put up--shows both a 1:1 and a 4:1
balun--winding diagrams are below each, respectively...

Don't bother to look - they are both voltage baluns.

(And the drawings have been scanned from someone else's copyright
material.)


--
73 from Ian GM3SEK 'In Practice' columnist for RadCom (RSGB)
http://www.ifwtech.co.uk/g3sek