Copyright on HP service manuals

Looks like HP has agreed to allow BAMA to publish. A well coined letter to Agilent counsul was the key to open this door. Thanks to all involved with getting this important job done. We all love surplus HP gear!

regards N9NEO

We should download them all and burn CDs before they change their minds!

What I really want are the schematics for the HP9100 desktop calculator, ca 1965. I have two, both dead, and it's sad that they won't allow anybody to get the info needed to restore these classics.

It's amazing that HP actually reused the 9100 model number for some poorly-reviewed inkjet printer/fax thing.

John

A few observations:

- If the manual is separate from the instrument, it will get separated from the equipment and lost. Doesn't matter if it's on paper, a CD, a website, or whatever.

- In these latter days, memory is cheaper than dirt. Especially if it's ROM.

- Small flash-memory drives with a USB connector are rather ubitiquous.

So... why not store the manuals INSIDE the instruments, and not have this problem again?

Have a USB port somewhere on the instrument. Plug in a flash drive, push a button, and get a .txt or .pdf dumped to the flash drive. A fancy instrument could use a menu selection to dump a nice PDF from a big ROM; an inexpensive one could use a little recessed switch on the back panel to bit-bang a text file out the USB port with an 8051 or something. Perhaps even a serial port doing an ASCII (or Kermit or similar) transfer for a really low-dollar solution. Instruments fancy enough to have their own Ethernet / Web server could simply serve documents through that interface. If they just have Ethernet and TCP/IP, maybe a "magic packet" to a well-known port (17?) on a non-routable IP address could trigger a manual dump via FTP.

The storage inside the instrument would need to be in ROM, or else it will eventually get erased. If the instrument takes firmware updates, there should be a mechanism for the updates to include addenda pages in the manual dump, but the updates shouldn't be able to overwrite the original manual.

This won't do a thing for all those instruments floating around out there now. (Or maybe this has already been thought of and implemented; I don't get to buy much brand multi-kilodollar test equipment at work.) But if the market could agree on some kind of standard, and get the vendors to accept it, the "missing manual" problem could be reduced a great deal.

Matt Roberds

I beg to differ, we did not attack Agilent's legal right to restrict the manual information if they chose, we attacked Agilent's apparent choice to do so. It now appears they did no more than (roughly) assert their right to grant permission after it's sought, which we do not question. But we do argue that it would have been unreasonable, counterproductive, mean-minded and unfair to deprive the legitimate owners of their older instruments the right to fully run and maintain those instruments, if they were unfortunate enough not to own one of the rare original manuals.

Tektronix has specifically released their copyrights on obsolete manuals.

In fact you are attacking the concept of copyright. Aligent owns the copyright and has the last say. It seems that they _have_ reversed their position, so maybe your whining did help. ;-)

I should add, that at this point, after the dust has settled, it does not appear Agilent is in fact overly restricting the copying of their old manuals (despite the language of their lawyer's take-down letter), because they do grant permission when it's sought, including a type of blanket permission, and also even including the right to charge for the service, AFAICT. BTW, I received an email from the (former) co-leader of HP's company-wide committee handling this issue, and this was their economically-derived carefully-thought-out company policy six years ago, and it would still appear to be, unless we learn otherwise.

So, it all appears to be a non-issue. Move along, nothing to see here.

like

"mad"

Whatever's

by

while

out

It seems that to maintain civility, some loss of freedom seems to be necessary. Like with spam and email. Taking away the ability to spam anonymously brings complaints from those who say that will also take away the freedom to email anonymously. Yeah, it seems so. If you want to remain anonymous by wearing a ski mask, it'd probably make a lot of difference on how you're treated when you walk into a 7-11.

Precisely. They have the legal right to restrict redistribution of this stuff any way they want. However, it does not benefit them to do what they were doing. That was everyone's point except Keith's.

This brings to mind those who answer their telephone when their caller ID says "unknown" or "anonymous" or whatever it is. Why would I want the people whom I'm pestering to not know who I am?

Thanks, Rich

"encouraging

saying HP

manuals

the

their

restrict the

choice

question.

in

information.

maintain

of

internet.

understand

And you should learn the difference between a book and a manual.

Speak for youself. ...though I did note that you were going to hide behind your "library" (fair use) rights. Don't get me wrong, I think their desision was dumb, but it *was* their desision (fortunately recinded, AIUI).

It's more than that. You (and others) beleived that their rights were limited by availability. On the contrary, their rights are limited by their wishes. ...for whatever business reasons they seem to think is in their interest.

I'm not going to talk about "unreasonable". I don't have the information. I *do* know that it is *THEIR* choice.

Oh, my; "mean-minded"! I want you to publish your books on the internet. To do otherwise is "mean-minded". You above all here, should understand the importance of the copyright.

Exactly! Were I Aligent, I'd publish them and bust the heads of anyone else doing the same. There is likely a contract to another publishing company that's getting in the way here too. This stuff isn't as simple as the academics wish it to be.

No, I did not believe that. The main point that all of us were making is that HP was doing something that did not seem to be in HP's own best interest, whether or not they realized it.

But it seems that a large portion of copyright law has not yet dawned on you. Laws are not like computer programs. They do not operate simply by being written. Copyright laws are enforced by courts, largely through suits for damages. If there is no damage, there is nothing to sue for. That is how the concept of fair use was originally recognized, although nowadays it is formally written into the law.

Please, please, please, go and READ A BOOK ABOUT COPYRIGHT LAW. I recommend "The Copyright Book," by Strong, published by MIT Press.

We're not talking a work of art, entertainment, or even an optional service manual. This is an operator manual that originally came with each and every piece of gear correct? The manual is of no use without the gear and since each piece of gear originally came with the manual, if you have the gear but are missing the manual I see no moral or ethical reason not to copy it. Seems reasonable that by owning the equipment you own the rights to have a copy of the manual, it's like giving someone a copy of a driver for a piece of computer hardware they own, only the intellectual property zealots would have any sort of problem with it.

Although the present discussion has been defused by Agilent giving BAMA permission to freely distribute their old HP manual copies from their website, we're game for the discussion to continue anyway. :>)

I agree with your point, James Sweet, but the issue isn't simply an instrument owner copying an operating manual for his own use; remember, he doesn't have one to copy! Instead, it's the right of someone who has a manual (and likely no instrument) to copy it, for a fee, for someone else. Clearly if that broad right isn't granted, this putative someone won't have any motivation to provide the sought-after service to this putative somebody else. Furthermore, our putative somebody else may well not have an HP instrument either, and may merely wish to peruse the designs of the masters for his own purposes. Perhaps he is writing a book, or designing an improved version of the old instrument... We consider these possibilities just to complicate matters, don't you see.

Actually, I didn't write any of the above.

Ok, maybe you want to explain what this "difference" has to do with copyright law.