Catalyst Audio Buchla 100 clones for Eurorack

[LaBelleAurore]

Is that circuits are not covered by copyright but their functionality can be covered by patent. In the US at least - patents expire after 20 years. So assuming that these modules were ever patented, they would be about 30 years beyond that point.

Schematics are, without a doubt, subject to copyright in the US. Copyright term lasts for the life of the author plus 70 years. If Don had not sold the 100 series to CBS, his copyright would still be good until 2086. Because Don sold to CBS and CBS sold their rights, someone out there does hold the rights to the 100 series schematics, and those rights will continue until 2086. Who that is remains a mystery.

This is complete nonsense. Schematics are not subject to copyright, although pcb layout can be. Since this is a totally different form factor, I am guessing that won't be a problem.

I don't know where you get your info, but the visual representation of a circuit (schematic) is protected under US copyright. Just go to copyright.gov and search for copyright registrations for schematics. The copyright exists the moment the visual representation is created (this is called 'fixed in a tangible medium' in copyright law parlance). You don't need a registration to hold copyright, though you cannot sue in Federal court for infringement without a registration. That's why people register their copyrights.

For instance, copyright registration number VAu000012903 is for a schematics and parts list for alarm model 2512-B.

[coolshirtdotjpg]

Is that circuits are not covered by copyright but their functionality can be covered by patent. In the US at least - patents expire after 20 years. So assuming that these modules were ever patented, they would be about 30 years beyond that point.

Schematics are, without a doubt, subject to copyright in the US. Copyright term lasts for the life of the author plus 70 years. If Don had not sold the 100 series to CBS, his copyright would still be good until 2086. Because Don sold to CBS and CBS sold their rights, someone out there does hold the rights to the 100 series schematics, and those rights will continue until 2086. Who that is remains a mystery.

This is complete nonsense. Schematics are not subject to copyright, although pcb layout can be. Since this is a totally different form factor, I am guessing that won't be a problem.

I don't know where you get your info, but the visual representation of a circuit (schematic) is protected under US copyright. Just go to copyright.gov and search for copyright registrations for schematics. The copyright exists the moment the visual representation is created (this is called 'fixed in a tangible medium' in copyright law parlance). You don't need a registration to hold copyright, though you cannot sue in Federal court for infringement without a registration. That's why people register their copyrights.

For instance, copyright registration number VAu000012903 is for a schematics and parts list for alarm model 2512-B.

Every company that has ever posted on here has made it clear that you cannot copyright a schematic. Again, you seem to be confusing PCB layouts with schematics.

[nectarios]

I only know what I read on the internet (including official Sonicstate, I think, post with the court case) regarding Don and BEMI.

Personally, I am not keen on paying good cash to the people that did this. I could be wrong as I don't know half of it, but this is the way I see it right now.

[loydb]

A schematic is only copyrightable as essentially an image -- I can't photocopy your schematic and use it in my book. I can, however, redraw it.

You are confusing PCBs and the circuit that it represents.

Look up Mackie vs. Behringer.

[coolshirtdotjpg]

A schematic is only copyrightable as essentially an image -- I can't photocopy your schematic and use it in my book. I can, however, redraw it.

You are confusing PCBs and the circuit that it represents.

Look up Mackie vs. Behringer.

A much more clear version of what I was trying to say. Thanks.

[LaBelleAurore]

A schematic is only copyrightable as essentially an image -- I can't photocopy your schematic and use it in my book. I can, however, redraw it.

You are confusing PCBs and the circuit that it represents.

Look up Mackie vs. Behringer.

A much more clear version of what I was trying to say. Thanks.

The Mackie v. Behringer case you are referring to took place in a UK court. It has no impact on US copyright law. Read the decision, it's from the England and Wales High Court.

The Mackie v. Behringer that took place in the US in a Federal court in Seattle was dismissed because the parties settled and the records were sealed. It was not dismissed because the court found schematics are not covered by copyright. If you are relying on Wikipedia for your legal interpretation, I suggest you get a copy of the actual order dismissing the case. The case was dismissed on 11/05/1999, not 11/30/1999 as is mistakenly reported on Wikipedia.

You can believe what you want, but again, there are thousands and thousands and thousands of US copyright registrations for schematics. Seriously, check for yourself. Schematics (I mean schematics) are protected under US copyright.

[sempervirent]

The technical details of a schematic are not the type of intellectual property that US copyright law protects.

Copyright applies to images, sound and video recordings, written works, etc... fixed artifacts that can be directly reproduced and sold. Only the copyright holder has the "right" to profit from making a "copy" of that work.

An original schematic drawing can be copyrighted but the copyright only covers the drawing itself. The technical information conveyed within the drawing falls within the realm of patents, not copyrights.

To give a relevant example, check Bob Moog's patent 3,475,623 for the ladder filter. The schematics included in the patent are used to support the technical implementation. He's not submitting the schematics for copyright protection, he's submitting the schematics to support his rights of invention. The patent protects the technical implementation, not reproduction of the schematics.

While it's true that the schematic drawings themselves were also copyrighted (because copyright is conferred automatically at the moment of creation), the technical implementation was protected by the patent, not the copyright. You can't copy the drawing itself until the copyright expires, but the patent has already expired so there are no legal limits on copying the implementation.

That's my current understanding at least, I'd welcome contrary evidence (i.e. direct links to case law).

[LaBelleAurore]

That's my current understanding at least, I'd welcome contrary evidence (i.e. direct links to case law).

Ok, this is my last post on this topic. I’m sure the mods are getting sick of this debate.

Your post communicates a fundamental misunderstanding about what U.S. Copyright is, what U.S. Copyright protects, and how U.S. Copyright works in practice (there is also a fundamental misunderstanding of Patent law, but I don’t have enough time to go into it here).

U.S. Copyright protects “original works of authorship fixed in a tangible medium.” These two requirements are the criteria for copyright. There seems to be some disagreement here on Muff’s on whether or not schematics meet the criteria for copyrightability. Schematics do meet this criteria and are routinely granted copyright registrations. This is a fact. The fact that there are thousands and thousands of U.S. Copyright registrations for schematics is all the proof anyone needs to know if the U.S. Copyright law considers schematics “an original work of authorship fixed in a tangible medium” to which they grant the authors copyright. The U.S. Copyright office would not grant registrations to schematics if they were not considered the proper subject matter of copyright. If you disagree with this, I can’t do anything more for you because you are ignoring reality.

So what is a copyright?

Copyright is 5 exclusive rights. A copyright author is granted these 5 exclusive rights. These 5 exclusive rights last for the life of the author plus 70 years after they die. The 5 exclusive rights are:

1. Right to duplicate the work
2. Right to distribute the work
3. Right to prepare derivative works from the original work
4. Right to perform the work
5. Right to display the work

How does this apply to schematics?

Example 1: Engineer A (we’ll call him Don B) dreams up a new module, designs the circuit, and authors a schematic in his schematic capture program (or by hand on paper, it doesn’t matter).

1. The schematic is an “original work of authorship fixed in a tangible medium” so Engineer A now has a copyright covering the schematic. Engineer A is granted the 5 exclusive rights listed above.

2. Engineer A then loads or copies his schematic in to his PCB layout program. He has just DUPLICATED his schematic, DUPLICATION being one of his exclusive rights.

3. Engineer A then produces a PCB. The PCB is a DERIVATIVE work of the original schematic. Producing DERIVATIVE works is also one of his exclusive rights.

4. Engineer A now also has a copyright over the PCB which he produced, and this also comes with the 5 exclusive rights.

5. Engineer A builds and sells modules based on his PCB exercising his exclusive right to DISTRIBUTE the derivative work of his original schematic.

6. Everything is kosher.

Example 2: Engineer B (we’ll call him the bad guy) really likes Engineer A’s modules and decides he wants to make and sell clones of Engineer A’s modules.

1. Engineer B gets a copy of Engineer A’s schematic.

2. Engineer B loads or copies Engineer A’s schematic into his PCB layout program. Engineer B has just infringed Engineer A’s exclusive right to DUPLICATE his original schematic.

3. Engineer B produces a PCB from Engineer A’s schematic. Engineer B has just infringed Engineer A’s exclusive right to prepare DERIVATIVE works from his original schematic.

4. Engineer B builds and sells modules based on the PCB he created from Engineer A’s schematic. Engineer B has now infringed Engineer A’s exclusive right to DISTRIBUTE his derivative work.

5. Engineer B is fucked. Engineer A can sue him for infringement and take his earnings from sales of the infringing module as damages.

Example 3: Engineers C and D (we’ll call them the smart guys) also really like Engineer A’s modules and want to make and sell modules with similar functionality. Engineers C and D consult a good intellectual property attorney and learn that U.S. Copyright does not protect the FUNCTIONALITY of a circuit. Engineers C and D figure out a way around Engineer A’s copyright.

1. Engineer C studies Engineer A’s modules to learn all of its FUNCTIONALITY.

2. Engineer C reverse engineers the module, studies the components, measures voltages through the circuit, and looks at the output on a scope. No infringement here.

3. Engineer C writes a full FUNCTIONAL specification for the module describing all the desired functionality in detail. Having never seen Engineer A’s schematic there is no infringement here.

4. Engineer D takes Engineer C’s functional specification and designs a circuit and authors an original schematic. Having never seen Engineer A’s schematic or PCB, there is no infringement here. Engineer D now has a copyright in the schematic.

5. This is called a “clean room” implementation and is fully acceptable under U.S. Copyright law.

6. Engineers C and D produce PCB’s from their own schematic. The PCB is a DERIVATIVE work of their own original schematic. No infringement here.

7. Engineers C and D produce and sell modules based on their own PCB exercising their right to DISTRIBUTE their work. No Infringement here.

And that's all I have.

The morals of the story:

Don't copy schematics to build clone modules without permission from the copyright holder

[sempervirent]

Engineers C and D consult a good intellectual property attorney and learn that U.S. Copyright does not protect the FUNCTIONALITY of a circuit.

Right... that's the whole point of my post.

The reason that thousands of schematic images are protected by copyright registration is because they are images, like any other illustration, diagram, map, or photograph.

[loowfizzz]

ok that derailed quickly! like every other thread about Don´s legacy.

I really look forward to the modules and to some audio demos as well.

Hope the panels will be aluminium.

[The Junglechrist]

Is there still nous infos about availability yet ?

[nearly ghost]

Curious about these too.. Still happening or what?

[RussiaZero23]

yes I would love to know if buchla 100 series (that look like mini buchla 100) come to euroland. (I am poor and can never afford real buchla 100 or 200 series.

[CatalystAudio]

Still happening.

Just moving along slower than we'd hoped.

Just sent out for what will hopefully be the final versions of the PCB's a few days ago.

And just for fun, heres some hot 100 series co-mingling action.

[Numanoid92]

i'm really really interested in those modules.. looking forward to have them in my hands

[nearly ghost]

Still happening.

Just moving along slower than we'd hoped.

Just sent out for what will hopefully be the final versions of the PCB's a few days ago.

And just for fun, heres some hot 100 series co-mingling action.

Looking good! Thanks for the update

[ugokcen]

Never had a chance to hear a Buchla in person and this might be the next best thing. Any chance of uploading some sound examples? Come on, just a tease

I think functionality-wise Make Noise and Verbos have matched or even surpassed the original Buchla designs. But they don't make clones (or intend to), so part of me wonders if there is any "magic" to the sound of vintage Buchlas as the owners claim.

[Zube]

This is good news! Can't wait to here more!

[southphillysynths]

I'm particularly interested in the kits, glad to see there's more updates since last I saw.

Any word on kits first? Or prebuilt?

[nearly ghost]

Can someone clarify what the Model 156 Control Voltage processor does. Had a quick search online seems to be attenuate/offset, polarizer but im not 100%

Is it essential to the 158 or will my quadratt do the same job?

[nordheim]

i am very excited to hear more about these!

[CatalystAudio]

Can someone clarify what the Model 156 Control Voltage processor does. Had a quick search online seems to be attenuate/offset, polarizer but im not 100%

Is it essential to the 158 or will my quadratt do the same job?

Yes, it's basically a mixer/attenuator offset generator. There are 2 cv inputs on each channel (theres an "A" and a "B" channel) that are mixed via the bottom pot. The middle pot sets a fixed voltage (offset) and the top pot then mixes/adds the mix of cv coming into the inputs and the offset. This cv value is what is present at the output. Additionally, one of the inputs to the "B" channel is inverted automatically before being mixed. All the 100 series stuff (and pretty much all Buchla as far as I am aware) is based on unipolar (0 - 10v) voltages. So the inverting channel flips the CV but it always remains a positive voltage.

I'm not entirely sure what the quadratt does but yes you can do similar functions in a lot of different modules. When the original 100 series stuff was first released the 156 was the only way to mix and scale CV, so within that environment it was essential, in euro theres a lot of other things that can mix and scale CV so you can use whatever you like.

[nearly ghost]

Can someone clarify what the Model 156 Control Voltage processor does. Had a quick search online seems to be attenuate/offset, polarizer but im not 100%

Is it essential to the 158 or will my quadratt do the same job?

Yes, it's basically a mixer/attenuator offset generator. There are 2 cv inputs on each channel (theres an "A" and a "B" channel) that are mixed via the bottom pot. The middle pot sets a fixed voltage (offset) and the top pot then mixes/adds the mix of cv coming into the inputs and the offset. This cv value is what is present at the output. Additionally, one of the inputs to the "B" channel is inverted automatically before being mixed. All the 100 series stuff (and pretty much all Buchla as far as I am aware) is based on unipolar (0 - 10v) voltages. So the inverting channel flips the CV but it always remains a positive voltage.

I'm not entirely sure what the quadratt does but yes you can do similar functions in a lot of different modules. When the original 100 series stuff was first released the 156 was the only way to mix and scale CV, so within that environment it was essential, in euro theres a lot of other things that can mix and scale CV so you can use whatever you like.

Thanks for the info.

[nordheim]

Can someone clarify what the Model 156 Control Voltage processor does. Had a quick search online seems to be attenuate/offset, polarizer but im not 100%

Is it essential to the 158 or will my quadratt do the same job?

Yes, it's basically a mixer/attenuator offset generator. There are 2 cv inputs on each channel (theres an "A" and a "B" channel) that are mixed via the bottom pot. The middle pot sets a fixed voltage (offset) and the top pot then mixes/adds the mix of cv coming into the inputs and the offset. This cv value is what is present at the output. Additionally, one of the inputs to the "B" channel is inverted automatically before being mixed. All the 100 series stuff (and pretty much all Buchla as far as I am aware) is based on unipolar (0 - 10v) voltages. So the inverting channel flips the CV but it always remains a positive voltage.

I'm not entirely sure what the quadratt does but yes you can do similar functions in a lot of different modules. When the original 100 series stuff was first released the 156 was the only way to mix and scale CV, so within that environment it was essential, in euro theres a lot of other things that can mix and scale CV so you can use whatever you like.

any ballpark on when you think there will be more release info/videos/audio/demos or something on these? I am very interested in them and wonder how much i need to start saving..

[coolshirtdotjpg]

Still happening.

Just moving along slower than we'd hoped.

Just sent out for what will hopefully be the final versions of the PCB's a few days ago.

And just for fun, heres some hot 100 series co-mingling action.

Very Cool! That's the modular I learned analog synthesis on. Can't wait to pick up one of your oscillators.