 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
68.192.130.157
In Reply to: Re: Anyone seen the FIM(First Impression Music)Isolation bearings? posted by Mr. Walker on October 21, 2004 at 13:26:58:
Hi Mr. Walker,"In any case, group buyers should note that the only reason they can get the specs to make Hip Joints in bulk is because the designer thought about doing the same thing and took a pass."
You appear to misinterpret my reasoning, motives and intentions.
Hip Joints have a history that is now more than 3 years running. If you read my posts carefully, you'll find that although I consulted with one attorney early on, when I considered marketing them, and decided not to, I have also posted on numerous occasions that there is something about sharing the idea for free that I find quite appealing.
Despite your repetition of the assertion of one individual (who has never seen them) that the design is a "copy", Hip Joints predated the commercial product he refers to by at least a year. Before referring to something a "copy" I believe it might be a good idea to actually see it. (I must admit to curiosity about minds that conjure dark motives on the part of others without bothering to question those others first.)
No one gets the specs "to make Hip Joints in bulk". They have always been given away for free for what I clearly state on the specs as "personal, non-commercial use".
Happy Listening!
Barry
Follow Ups:
Barry, you're right--I haven't read three years of your postings carefully. I actually have other, far more urgent priorities at the moment, namely scouring the Internet for a decent reel-to-reel player, preferably by Nagra or Stellavox.Instead I simply entered a Boolean search for "symposium + hip joints + patent violation," and this yielded the thread where you say:
"At one time I was considering a business for distributing Hip Joints but a conversation with a patent attorney made me feel I'd be vulnerable to a lawsuit from Symposium. That's why I began sending the spec to folks who would make or have them made for their own use."
Apologies if I'm misreading this, but I inferred from this post that you were the copier, not the copied. Otherwise why would you be vulnerable to a lawsuit from Symposium? This I took to be the reason you decided against the business, as opposed to the sudden appeal of sharing the idea for free.
To bring this out of the theoretical realm, check out these shelves:
http://cls.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cls.pl?accsrack&1101329775.
I've been hunting around for some platforms lately, and as you would expect from the world's cheapest audiophile, these caught my eye. But this guy seems borderline unethical. On the one hand, he has to claim the shelf is nearly identical to the real thing--otherwise no one would be interested. On the other hand, he has to say it's sufficiently different so that it's not a patent violation. That to me is as untenable a position as it is unethical.
Now what if 50 of us put together a "group buy" for this guy to machine shelves for us, and he'd charge just enough to cover his time and materials. Everyone wins, right? (Hint: this is a trick question.)
Mr. Walker
"One man deserves the credit.
One man deserves the blame.
Nikolai Ivanovich Lobachevsky is his name."
That are for sale in the link you posted are what are known around here as Symposium Clones. Yes, trying to sell one is pretty stupid.I don't know enough about patent law or current patents to comment much on any of the roller designs that are out there. I may see if I can buy a license to manufacture bird diapers (reference to a separte patent-related post), though.
-Pete
I went to his website and they aren't a symmetrical construction like the Symposiums or most constrained layer devices. They are 5 different layers from top to bottom.All of the constrained layer approaches I've seen until now, including Symposium, have an aba or abcba type construction where the letters represent different materials, with harder/denser materials on the outside and lighter materials in the centre. This guy's construction is abcde - a very different approach. I haven't seen any commercially available devices constructed in that manner, but that doesn't mean there aren't any.
David Aiken
Hi Mr. Walker,"Apologies if I'm misreading this, but I inferred from this post that you were the copier, not the copied. Otherwise why would you be vulnerable to a lawsuit from Symposium? This I took to be the reason you decided against the business, as opposed to the sudden appeal of sharing the idea for free."
I said in my last post, the design a certain individual accuses me of copying came out a full year after I was posting here about Hip Joints and sending the specs to anyone who asked for them.
As to your inference, had you asked me you would have found that the aspect that concerned that attorney was the "rolling member in a depression" phrase in the original patent. At the time, he just wasn't sure because, I believe, he was consulting gratis and did not spend much time reading the pertinent information. I decided not to pursue it further and took to the idea of making the specs free. This wasn't "sudden" as you suggest (as a two minute conversation in pursuit of the facts would have informed you). Further, the design which the attorney was looking into was the original one, the one with the patent.
Good luck with your Nagra/Stellavox search. What is your intended use for such a machine?
Happy Listening!
Barry
Barry,There are tons of great classical and jazz reels that are essentially being tossed; the Stellavox is just a good excuse to rescue them. That, and sometimes I like to imagine motoring across the Mongolian desert recording traditional throat singers. Or driving a scooter down the steps of the Paris metro with a portable Nagra in my knapsack . . .
Getting back to the Hip Joints, you seem to be saying that while your design is based on the Rollerblocks, it's different enough not to infringe on Symposium's patent. I take it that means you believe you have the right to produce these commercially, despite the advice of your attorney, and that maybe you will someday. But how different could the designs and materials be? You yourself say the Hip Joints are so close to Symposium's streamlined version of the Rollerblocks that if anything Symposium copied you, and not vice versa. Clearly, there could be no question of Symposium copying you unless you felt there were substantial similarities between the two designs.
I want to return to the example of the Symposium Clone shelves being sold on Audiogon. We can go back and forth about what constitutes a substantial difference or similarity, etc., but let's just invoke the "smell test" for a moment. There's something wrong, and lazy, and kind of sad about having to append "like Symposium" to the name of your product. If this Symposi-cloner simply made shelves for himself or mailed specs out to individual users, like you do with your Hip Joints, then I guess it wouldn't be so bad. But my point has been that a "group buy" takes this to another level. In fact, you seemed to be coming around to this point of view when you said, "No one gets the specs to make Hip Joints in bulk." Well, if that's so, why did you condone the bulk manufacture, or group buy, of your Hip Joints that was organized through the Audio Asylum?
In any case, I should note that I don't have any ties to Symposium, Final Labs, Vistek, or any of the other titans of the isobearing industry who are conspiring to squash the little guy in his quest to tame unruly vibrations. My interest in this began because I thought we should give a fair hearing to Fred Volz's argument that the collective manufacture of a patented product is crossing the line, and that the use of Audio Asylum to promote this is a slippery slope as well. We've seen it time and again on the Asylum where people pound the table for a product or blast competing ones only to emerge later as a dealer or manufacturer of that product later on. Whether this is what's going on with the Hip Joints, I'll leave aside for now, especially as it's unclear whether Hip Joints are a viable commercial product to begin with.
Mr. Walker
"The immature artist imitates. The mature artist steals."
Mr. Walker,"...you seem to be saying that while your design is based on the Rollerblocks..."
"Seem to be"? Didn't we just finish talking about the differences between inferences and facts? My design has nothing in common with Rollerblocks other than they both use a ball and a "cup". This is a concept the goes back nearly a century (as doing a bit of research first would have informed you). The patent on the commercial product includes its shape, the matrix of holes drilled in the bottom and the stated purpose of these. Hip Joints have nothing in common with this.
"...In fact, you seemed to be coming around to this point of view when you said, 'No one gets the specs to make Hip Joints in bulk.' Well, if that's so, why did you condone the bulk manufacture, or group buy, of your Hip Joints that was organized through the Audio Asylum?"
Inferrence again. You conclude my statement implies I am "coming around" to your point of view but that is nothing like what I said. I have given no one the right to manufacture Hip Joints as a commercial product. Unlike yourself, I did not deem the group buy a commercial venture. If I wanted to make a commercial venture out of Hip Joints, I'd have announced it and offered a link to a commercial site.
As to giving "fair hearing" to anyone's arguments, please forgive me if I find people who accuse me of plagiarism and dark intentions without supporting their arguments, not exactly the kind of folks whose names I would use in the same sentence as the word "fair".
Regarding the Hip Joints themselves, I can understand and respect differences of opinion regarding the group buy and whether it constitutes commerce or not. (I have been giving this a lot of thought, though at this point I still see nothing wrong.) What I can't understand are accusations of copyright infringement and other forms of theft that are based on supposition and hearsay as opposed to hard evidence. Also, if folks are going to be so free and easy about assaulting my honor and my reputation, I would ask anyone making these accusations to "put up or shut up". (I apologize for putting this somewhat indelicately but this is getting tiresome.)
Barry
and it seems to be pretty generally accepted practice that the term refers to "for profit" endeavors.
Barry,The idea that there’s more than meets the eye to the rollerblock “group buy” seems to be gaining some traction here, so I guess I can leave off now. Let me just respond to some of your more challenging assertions, if you don’t mind.
The reason I said “seems to be” is because if Hip Joints have nothing at all to do with Rollerblocks, then I was having trouble reconciling that with your frequent suggestion that Symposium copied your design, along with the fact that you used Rollerblocks as a constant point of reference during the design of the Hip Joints.
Also, when you say “My designs have nothing in common with Rollerblocks other than they both use a ball and a cup,” shouldn’t you also include things like the use of 7075 aluminum and ½” tungsten carbide balls? Why don’t those count?
Finally, I was quoting you directly when you said, “No one gets the specs to make Hip Joints in bulk,” so apologies if I took this at face value, and pointed out that it conflicts with the group buy. Just out of curiosity, though, why is it that you give no one the right to manufacture these on a commercial basis? If your goal is simply to share the design with as many people as possible, what difference does it make to you who manufactures them?
Mr. Walker
Mr. Walker,"The idea that there’s more than meets the eye to the rollerblock 'group buy' seems to be gaining some traction here, so I guess I can leave off now."
The debate comes down to two things in my mind. The first is whether or not the group buy constitutes an act of commerce, which would be against the rules of the Asylum. The second consists of unsupported assertions that there is some dark purpose behind Hip Joints and that someone's intellectual property has been stolen. I personally see a large difference between a group of hobbyists joining in to have some devices made and an act of commerce. The second issue is one where no one has bothered to investigate the facts but some are quick to offer condemning points of view.
"I was having trouble reconciling that with your frequent suggestion that Symposium copied your design, along with the fact that you used Rollerblocks as a constant point of reference during the design of the Hip Joints."
Symposium released their "Jr." model more than a year after Hip Joints were being publicized here and the specs given away freely. I found the radical change in design from the original, drilled and filled rectangle odd. I don't know if Hip Joints were copied but they did exist publicly long before the Jrs.
As to "constant point of reference", those are not my words. In my oldest posts I talked about being impressed with the Rollerblocks and my deciding to try my own design, which I compared to Rollerblocks to see how I'd done. I don't believe this is the same as "constant point of reference". By the way, the Rollerblocks I'd heard were the original block-shaped, drilled and filled design which have no resemblance to Hip Joints.
"...when you say 'My designs have nothing in common with Rollerblocks other than they both use a ball and a cup,' shouldn’t you also include things like the use of 7075 aluminum and ½” tungsten carbide balls?"
Yes we have 7075 aluminum in common. Unless I'm mistaken, this is not a proprietary material and is used on all sorts of constructs. I also tried 6061 aluminum as well as other materials during the design phase. The specs for Hip Joints, which I am fairly confident you have not yet seen, call for chrome steel balls, not tungsten carbide though in this case too, we are not talking about a proprietary material or one that is not in common use in many similar designs.
"Just out of curiosity, though, why is it that you give no one the right to manufacture these on a commercial basis? If your goal is simply to share the design with as many people as possible, what difference does it make to you who manufactures them?"
Are you asking for manufacturing rights? Where does it say I am obliged to license my design to an external manufacturer? I never said anything about "as many people as possible". This is another case where you attribute your own words to me. My goal has been simply to have fun and share the design with whom I like, when I like.
With that last statement in mind I must say the fun is rapidly being drained from this place which of late seems populated with some quite bitter and judgemental individuals who continue to make assertions as they continue to avoid supplying any evidence to support those assertions.
I will continue to give out the specs for Hip Joints to who I want, when I want. Despite the assertions of a number of individuals, I have made no efforts to make Hip Joints a commercial product (having in fact turned down a few requests for licensing). I have been freely sharing the specs for Hip Joints with other members of this community we call the Asylum, because I took it to be a community.
If this is how long-standing members are treated, while those committing libelous assaults (and then going silent instead of providing evidence) are coddled, I have no more to say on this subject.
Barry
Barry, of course I’m not asking for the manufacturing rights to Hip Joints. I wouldn’t want them any more than I’d want a license to produce “Pucci” loafers or “Prado” suits. I was just wondering, since you have no intention to manufacture these commercially, why you don’t post or publish the specs instead of sending them out one at a time over the Audio Asylum. Wouldn’t it save you a lot of time? I am not arguing that this is what you should do; I am merely asking what harm it would do.Mr. Walker
"I was just wondering, since you have no intention to manufacture these commercially, why you don’t post or publish the specs instead of sending them out one at a time over the Audio Asylum. Wouldn’t it save you a lot of time? I am not arguing that this is what you should do; I am merely asking what harm it would do.""Merely asking"? Based on the unsupported accusations as well as the inferrences in your prior posts, please forgive me if I don't quite believe that to be the case. But I'll answer you anyway in the hope you might understand.
In answer to your "merely" asked question, I like the contact with each individual who has an interest in adding them to their system. I always ask where the person is located too, out of curiosity about how far and wide my little creation has traveled. I also ask to hear about their experience with them if they have some made.
I've said elsewhere that Hip Joints specs are shared in a spirit of joy and camaraderie. No commerce, nothing hidden. It is for Fun and because I enjoy the exchanges with other hobbyists. Is this so difficult to comprehend?
I honestly don't know how to make my intentions any clearer.
Barry
on the Symposium/Hip Joint roller bearing subject.Symposium brought a product to market called Roller Blocks
Barry then designed Hip Joints
Symposium then introduced a new product call Roller Block Jr.
It is the Roller Block Jr. product that was introduced after Barry's design that is nearly identical to Hip Joints
Wellfed, this is exactly correct. Just don’t tell Barry that his Hip Joints are “nearly identical” to the Rollerblock Jrs., or he’ll have a hemorrhage.The argument goes like this: Rollerblock Jrs. (as one might guess from the name) have a whole lot in common with Rollerblocks. Identical cup and ball dimensions, for example. On the other hand, Rollerblock Jrs. (as you point out) are also nearly identical to Hip Joints. But somehow, according to Barry, Hip Joints have “nothing in common with Rollerblocks other than they both use a ball and a cup.” Now, it doesn’t take a Bertrand Russell to spot the logical flaw there. Or at least the exaggeration.
So we are left with three extremely closely related rollerblock designs. Barry alternately claims that the Hip Joints have nothing to do with the Rollerblocks (when he wants to show how original they are), and that they are very close to the Rollerblock Jrs (when he wants to say Symposium ripped off his idea). But since we all can see how interrelated the designs are, let me propose the following argument for Team Hip Joints:
Barry made some modifications to Symposium Rollerblocks, and soon afterwards Symposium released a similar modification. Of course, we know nothing about when Symposium developed this modification—it could have been weeks, months, or years before they released it. But Barry should be enterprising and argue that Symposium was too lazy or complacent to conduct its own research and therefore had to camp out on Audio Asylum looking for ideas to steal. Barry should therefore request some credit for helping to introduce this product modification. It's a relatively modest line of attack, but far more plausible than claiming to have designed a completely independent roller bearing product.
OK, that’s it for me, having now argued *both* sides of the position.
Mr. Walker
...since I have never looked closely enough at the RB Jr.'s to have made this statement. I should have said superficially similar considering the level of knowledge I possess on the subject.
"nothing you can make that hasn't been made." -John Lennon
First in a long list of stuff Lennon was on the wrong side of. not really surprising, it it?
regards,
Douglas
!
Beware the man who behaves deceitfully towards others, for there is nothing else to save you from his deceiving you
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
