Antenna optimization
 

Dear Roy and the group:

As you know, my other job is that of a patent attorney. It is time to
comment.

We are not concerned with patents. It is common to overlap patent
protection of something useful with copyright protection of an expression.
This is more common when software is involved because a patent might involve
software and Congress has made it clear that software is amiable of
copyright protection.

As you have observed, a copyright notice is no longer required.
However, I always tell clients to provide such a notice. Judges, most
reasonably, may wonder why a notice was not provided when to do so costs (in
most cases) nothing and the absence of a notice can cause mischief. The
requirement not to require notices was due to pressure from European
interests.

If one thinks one will need to defend one's copyright, it is beneficial
to register the copyright with the Copyright Office (part of the Library of
Congress) - a simple process.

Let us turn to what copyright is: it is the right to prevent the making
of copies of a work by others. One who holds a copyright to a work has the
right to control copies of that work. Congress and the courts have carved
out some exceptions. We have seen one used here where one copies small
sections of a copyrighted book or paper. Researchers and universities are
given some narrow rights to copy the works of others. In a law suit, an
important aspect is the degree that someone's unauthorized copying has
actually injured the copyright owner.

Absent a specific contract to the contrary, one who legally purchases a
copyrighted work may sell it, destroy it, read it if it can be read, and run
it on a computer if it is software. Such a lawful copy may be used to
facilitate the crafting of another work (such as using WordPerfect to write
a letter) or may be used to facilitate the fabrication of useful articles
(such as the use of EZNEC to design an antenna that is improved in some
way).


Let us keep patent protection and copyright protection in their separate
cages.

To the issue of the French radio amateur who started this long string
(and with a nod to the opinion of the experienced radio amateur in the UK):
optimization of more than simple antennas still requires the intersession of
a thoughtful and experienced human. My experience has been that the human's
main contribution relates to crafting an adaptive notion of what optimum is,
for the subject antenna. In other words: knowing when further playing is
not appropriate.

73, Mac N8TT
--
J. Mc Laughlin; Michigan U.S.A.
Home:
"Roy Lewallen" wrote in message
...
Tom Ring wrote:

That's all there is in either version of YO that contains the
"copyright" in any form, case insensitive. I am ignoring the companion
programs. Interestingly, the .EXE files do not include a copyright
notice internal to the program, at least in plain text. The only thing
that shows when running the program (v6.x) is "Copyright 1995 by Brian
Beezley, K6STI All Rights Reserved" at the top line on the files menu.
I am writing the last from memory since it's a DOS program, so I might
not have it perfect.

Under current U.S. law, a copyright notice isn't required in order to
secure a copyright; the copyright automatically exists as soon as the
work is created. Adding a copyright notice does bring some advantages
if a lawsuit is filed, however.

Disclaimer: I'm not an attorney.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

Antenna optimization
 

Tom Ring wrote:
hihi, CW for laughter.

hii hii, the beginning of the Texas Aggie war hymn.

"Hullabaloo, Caneck! Caneck! Hullabaloo, Caneck! Caneck!"
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Antenna optimization
 

On Wed, 12 Jul 2006 23:12:20 -0400, "J. Mc Laughlin"
wrote:


Absent a specific contract to the contrary, one who legally purchases a
copyrighted work may sell it, destroy it, read it if it can be read, and run
it on a computer if it is software. Such a lawful copy may be used to
facilitate the crafting of another work (such as using WordPerfect to write
a letter) or may be used to facilitate the fabrication of useful articles
(such as the use of EZNEC to design an antenna that is improved in some
way).

Mac, I am not sure of you meaning of a "specific contract".

It is often the case that we acquire software (being a copyright work)
under a licence that is an agreement between the licensor and the
licensee.

The agreement may be in the form of a general license, for instance an
end user licence that the user is deemed to have accepted in using the
software, or it could be in the form of a specific formal agreement
executed by the parties.

That agreement may limit the licensee's rights, including the purpose
for which software is used.

I give an example, the BestOne mainframe performance evaluation suite
licence limited it use to execution a specific computer and explicitly
only for analysis of performance data collected from that computer.

Isn't the license agreement like any contract in that the parties can
agree to anything lawful.

It seems to me that one has to read the relevant licence agreement to
form a view on what is or isn't permitted by the licence in addition
to any rights under copyright statutes.

Owen
--

Antenna optimization
 

Tom Ring wrote:

And YO could beat K1FO by only hudredths of a dB. If he'd had more CPU
power to do more runs per day...

YO7 includes a model of K1FO's 40 element 70 cm Yagi. In YO7, it
measures:

Gain 20.93
F/R 24.01
Z 21.8 + j5.4
SWR 1.0
Gain FOM -0.4 (versus theoretical limit for a given boom length)

In 10k iterations (minutes on a 250 MHz Pentium II), YO7 produced:

21.24
19.54
20.9 + j46.1
1.0
0.0 (I stopped it when it reached this)

You can tweak for Gain, F/R, etc depending on how you weight
performance tradeoffs. Looking at the current distribution, it appears
fewer elements might result in a better design. YO7 does not optimize
for number of elements but it doesn't take much effort to remove
elements and see what happens on the same boom length.

Regarding K1FO's design using Basic on a PDP11, here's Brian's
description:

************************************************** *********************************
YO includes an automatic optimizer that can maximize
forward gain and input resistance, and minimize backlobes,
sidelobes, and SWR. The optimizer iteratively adjusts element
lengths and spacings to optimize performance objectives you
specify using parameter tradeoffs you decide. It can perform
both local and global optimization.

YO is calibrated to NEC, the reference-accuracy
Numerical Electromagnetics Code from the Lawrence Livermore
National Laboratory. YO and NEC results normally differ by less
than 0.05 dB in forward gain, a dB or two in F/B, and a couple
ohms in input impedance. You can invoke NEC from within YO to
verify results.

YO's analysis and graphics engines use assembly language
with pipelined floating-point code optimized for Pentium processors.
************************************************** **********************************

The entire yo.exe program is only 82k (and DSP Blaster is only 16k).
The major change from YO6 to YO7 was the addition of global
optimization, so it will not get stalled on local maxima.

The other thing I must give Brian credit for is his excellent command
of English. I have *never* seen a spelling or grammatical error in any
of his documentation, which is very unusual these days.

73, Bill W4ZV

Antenna optimization
 

Antenna optimization
 

Richard Clark wrote:

SNIPPED

Franklin was right about these matters.

As for automated optimization, NASA spent huge bucks on this stuff to
design twisted paper clips to replace Walt's work of 30 years ago. I
can well bet that license runs pages. If the testimonials to Beezley
are any indicator, the utility of the software is in inverse
proportion to the length of its license.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

If I remember the anecdote: A patent guarantees you the right to sue.

Antenna optimization
 

If I remember the anecdote: A patent guarantees you the right to
sue.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
-

Is that why lawyers are all in favor of patents?

Antenna optimization
 

Dear Reg:

Patents are one of the things that makes a creative people great. In
the Republic's Constitution patents and copyright are listed. Citizens have
thereby a means to increase their wealth and provide employment while having
available the power of the courts to protect their rights.

Not all lawyers are in favor of patents. A few, before they are
cashiered, are against anything that inconveniences their clients, including
laws.

At the other extreme, a few lawyers serving as judges have expressed
disgust at the patent system, supposedly because it rewards the creative.

Please look for some Midwestern wine. It may assist you in recovering
the common sense seen in your early work.

Warm regards, Mac N8TT

--
J. Mc Laughlin; Michigan U.S.A.
Home:
"Reg Edwards" wrote

-

Is that why lawyers are all in favor of patents?

Antenna optimization
 

Richard Clark wrote:
On 12 Jul 2006 14:41:59 -0700, wrote:


Brian's revenue flow is not being broken since he no longer has any
revenue flow from it.


Hi Bill,

This is NOT a defense against infringement. The author's rights are
total, and the author's monopoly is total. There is nothing in the
law that suspends those rights or monopoly even in the event of death
of the author, so being out of the market place is a specious
argument.

This, and everything else you've had to offer may in fact be done, I
see folks run red lights frequently too.


If you read his agreement carefully, it only
prohibits transfer of the software itself.


I've read many agreements, but not this one. If you have a means to
render it faithfully here, then perhaps so; otherwise those others
I've read inform me better.


Richard, I loved the "irony" comment, but there is nothing preventing
the product of a piece of software from being used for something else.
It's quite legal, and that's how "things" work.

Designing an antenna from a piece of software does not mean that the
antenna design belongs to the person who writes the software. That would
mean that the person who did the programming for a CAD program owns the
rights to all the devices designed with it.


- 73 de Mike KB3EIA -

Antenna optimization
 

wrote:
Richard Clark wrote:

On 11 Jul 2006 13:45:49 -0700, wrote:


Ben AD7GD wrote:


On 2006-07-11, wrote:

Unfortunately K6STI no longer markets his software to hams (due to
software piracy issues). Hopefully you can find someone with a copy
who can optimize your initial results.

Careful, you're pegging my irony meter.

Why? The documentation says:

*********************************************** *************************
This software is copyrighted. It has been provided to
you on the condition that you will not sell, rent, lend, give
away, or otherwise transfer the software to others.
*********************************************** *************************

As I read it, there is no problem if I use it to optimize a model
for someone else. I'm NOT volunteering to do that however.

Hi Bill,

Strange as it may seem, yes you would be in violation.

Copyright is the author's total monopoly to insure his revenue from
his creation. If you disrupt that revenue flow you are breaking the
law. You said it yourself, he doesn't market to amateurs - rather
professionals who will pay for the LICENSE to use it professionally.
If they choose to do someone a favor, and drop their fee, that is
their hit, not his. He granted them the right, by LICENSE and at a
cost, to lose money if they wish.


Hi Richard,

1. I paid for the non-professional version of K6STI's software while he
WAS selling to amateurs. If you read his agreement carefully, it only
prohibits transfer of the software itself.

2. I am not sure Brian markets YO to professionals any longer. There
was apparently one well-known antenna manufacturer who bought his
non-professional version and used it to design commercial antennas. I
understand that this contributed to Brian's decision to exit the
amateur business, but the main reason was someone in Europe hacked his
RITTY program and posted it publicly.

I don't get it. A professional uses a piece of software designed for
non-professionals to design antennas, so the writer of the software
stops offering the software to the non-professionals? Seems backwards.



3. If I were to do a gratis optimization for someone today, that would
not violate the original license (i.e. transfer of the software itself)
and Brian's revenue flow is not being broken since he no longer has any
revenue flow from it. If a professional consultant were involved, they
would have to show they sustained actual damages (i.e. lost business)
which might be difficult to prove (not to mention the time and cost of
doing so).

You are correct of course, but I don't understand the basic premise.

Let us use say, Mathcad instead of YO. Mathcad sells it's software with
the full knowledge that people are going to do things with it. Like
design things, and make money with them - or research dollars. It is
exactly what the program is designed to do. Mathcad's authors do not own
or have copyright to those things designed with it.

If the gentleman gets angry because people use his software, that is
his right, but it seems odd.



Hence the irony meter being pegged.


No, that's the too-much-time-on-their-hands troll meter pegging. :-)

It's a shame the piracy issue drove K6STI from the ham business. He is
truly a genius and I love his AO, YO and DSP Blaster programs. I
believe he's now doing something in the audiophile business...their
gain and our loss.

Audiophiles!!!!! OMG!

Did ya ever see those rocks for audiophiles that are supposed to make
their sound systems sound better?....

or

http://www.musicdirect.com/products/...?sku=ABEDDBEAM

and:

http://www.musicdirect.com/products/...u=AAILUMINATOR

and of course:

http://www.musicdirect.com/products/...asp?sku=ACARCD


rant off


Oh well, as you can see, its an easier group to please....


Sorry for taking this OT thread even further OT...


- 73 de Mike KB3EIA

Antenna optimization
 

On Sun, 16 Jul 2006 22:25:30 -0400, Mike Coslo
wrote:

Richard, I loved the "irony" comment, but there is nothing preventing
the product of a piece of software from being used for something else.
It's quite legal, and that's how "things" work.


Hi Mike,

I thought this topic had died a placid death - George Romero (another
PA resident) must have a hand in its continuance....

Anyway, a review of:
http://craphound.com/msftdrm.txt
might give some insight into how industry has created their own rights
from legislation called DRM (Digital Rights Management).

"Thinking" something is legal is not always "how" things work.

The video presentation of this written document, circulating through
Micro$oft for several years, is available at Google Video:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...=cory+doctorow

You get to hear one of M$'s ringer lawyers try to pin Cory down, and
instead become roadkill. Cory rolled over him like a Lincoln.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Antenna optimization
 

Richard Clark wrote:
On Sun, 16 Jul 2006 22:25:30 -0400, Mike Coslo
wrote:


Richard, I loved the "irony" comment, but there is nothing preventing
the product of a piece of software from being used for something else.
It's quite legal, and that's how "things" work.



Hi Mike,

I thought this topic had died a placid death - George Romero (another
PA resident) must have a hand in its continuance....

Sorry about that, Richard - I shudda looked at the date before diving
in (half of a mixed metaphor), that was from the 12th

Anyway, a review of:
http://craphound.com/msftdrm.txt
might give some insight into how industry has created their own rights
from legislation called DRM (Digital Rights Management).

"Thinking" something is legal is not always "how" things work.

Of course not. I've no doubt that a person can be sued for anything,
and nothing can prevent that.


The video presentation of this written document, circulating through
Micro$oft for several years, is available at Google Video:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...=cory+doctorow

You get to hear one of M$'s ringer lawyers try to pin Cory down, and
instead become roadkill. Cory rolled over him like a Lincoln.

Okay, you got even with me, Richard! Sending me hours of interesting
stuff at 11:30 at night! ;^)

- 73 de Mike KB3EIA -

Antenna optimization
 

"Mike Coslo" wrote
If the gentleman gets angry because people use his software, that is his
right, but it seems odd.



No, it is the case where they made copies of his software and offered it for
free on the web site.

Yuri, K3BU