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