Log in
Register
Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Featured content
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
News
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Features
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Install the app
Install
Reply to thread
Home
Forums
Off Topic
The Basement
Copyright, Patent, General Intellectual Property Discussion (Branch from M32 Thread)
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="John Roberts" data-source="post: 115634" data-attributes="member: 126"><p>Re: New Midas M32 Console</p><p></p><p></p><p>While I can't speak for the others, the weight of anybody's comments in any community is considered in the context of their relationship to the community. If no relationship exists, and they do not identify their occupation or reason for participation, their comments get evaluated by their tone and content. </p><p></p><p>This is an example I what I mean by tone... As i clearly stated I was the first to use a slider for the channel fader on a small utility mixer for the MI market. It may have actually been done before in an obscure small professional mixer, but nothing that sold in any numbers. Before that it was common practice to use rotary controls for channel faders on small budget mixers. </p><p></p><p>You comments are progressively sounding like a troll... One who just picks arguments for no real purpose. Or perhaps introducing false arguments to try to discredit me. Good luck with that.</p><p><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'"><span style="color: #000000"></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'"><span style="color: #000000"></span></span><span style="color: #000000">My statement was about their preliminary specifications that may have been printed before their actual version even existed as hardware. This was from some trade show literature that somebody picked up for me. I am often handed piles of literature by my dealers who want me to see what's new. </span></p><p><span style="color: #000000"></span></p><p>Yet more expansive and fallacious arguments. is this junior high school debate club? Do I need to cite which fallacies you are arguing with? </p><p><span style="color: #000000"></span></p><p><span style="color: #000000">Why put quotes around words I did not say.. you are getting annoying. </span></p><p><span style="color: #000000"></span></p><p></p><p>I would be what they call someone "skilled in the art". I am a student of what work has been done before and stand on the shoulders of others. I have no doubt that my FLS invention was novel. </p><p> </p><p>Despite your apparent research you are missing the important distinction between how the sundry graphic EQs with level indicia over every slider work and my invention. The prior art your describe used a fixed threshold and individual comparators for every bandpass, so all of the bandpasses that exceeded that fixed threshold would illuminate simultaneously, not just the one loudest bandpass LED. This might indicate the feedback in an otherwise silent background or the feedback in addition to other sounds if several were above threshold. </p><p></p><p>My invention, to make this description as simple as I can, used a compound multiple input comparator where all of the BP outputs were compared to each other, so only the one loudest BP LED lights up. This behavior provided a useful one LED only indication in response to feedback that was perceived as useful and embraced by many sound system operators. The products using this were very successful. </p><p><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'"><span style="color: #000000"></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'"><span style="color: #000000">No they used the same compound mutli-input comparator as my invention. There were a few minor differences that were apparently enough to win their own patent for the improvement (cheaper). I have no idea how this was argued in court but probably not involving the discrete circuit design. As I have already conceded Behringer has won this case in court so legally I no longer claim that they are "infringing" on my invention . In addition to that my patent which issued in 1998 will expire soon so then it will be public domain and be free for all to use. As is the law. </span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'"><span style="color: #000000"></span></span></p><p></p><p>What people? You... ? it seems I have people supporting me, and people being rude to you. </p><p></p><p>You are not making credible, thoughtful, arguments, but increasingly argumentative and pejorative not to mention fallacious statements. </p><p></p><p>This may be entertaining to some, but it seems a huge waste of my time for me to keep rehashing the same subject over and over. </p><p></p><p>I have no desire to make the modern Behringer company look bad. However I find it difficult to ignore people telling me about me and my history. I was there...I lived my history. </p><p></p><p>You seem like an unusually motivated Behringer advocate, or do I have an equally motivated personal detractor that I do not know about? You are making it hard for me to like you. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":-)" title="Smile :-)" data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":-)" />. </p><p></p><p>JR</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="John Roberts, post: 115634, member: 126"] Re: New Midas M32 Console While I can't speak for the others, the weight of anybody's comments in any community is considered in the context of their relationship to the community. If no relationship exists, and they do not identify their occupation or reason for participation, their comments get evaluated by their tone and content. This is an example I what I mean by tone... As i clearly stated I was the first to use a slider for the channel fader on a small utility mixer for the MI market. It may have actually been done before in an obscure small professional mixer, but nothing that sold in any numbers. Before that it was common practice to use rotary controls for channel faders on small budget mixers. You comments are progressively sounding like a troll... One who just picks arguments for no real purpose. Or perhaps introducing false arguments to try to discredit me. Good luck with that. [FONT=Times New Roman][COLOR=#000000] [/color][/font][COLOR=#000000]My statement was about their preliminary specifications that may have been printed before their actual version even existed as hardware. This was from some trade show literature that somebody picked up for me. I am often handed piles of literature by my dealers who want me to see what's new. [/COLOR] Yet more expansive and fallacious arguments. is this junior high school debate club? Do I need to cite which fallacies you are arguing with? [COLOR=#000000] Why put quotes around words I did not say.. you are getting annoying. [/COLOR] I would be what they call someone "skilled in the art". I am a student of what work has been done before and stand on the shoulders of others. I have no doubt that my FLS invention was novel. Despite your apparent research you are missing the important distinction between how the sundry graphic EQs with level indicia over every slider work and my invention. The prior art your describe used a fixed threshold and individual comparators for every bandpass, so all of the bandpasses that exceeded that fixed threshold would illuminate simultaneously, not just the one loudest bandpass LED. This might indicate the feedback in an otherwise silent background or the feedback in addition to other sounds if several were above threshold. My invention, to make this description as simple as I can, used a compound multiple input comparator where all of the BP outputs were compared to each other, so only the one loudest BP LED lights up. This behavior provided a useful one LED only indication in response to feedback that was perceived as useful and embraced by many sound system operators. The products using this were very successful. [FONT=Times New Roman][COLOR=#000000] No they used the same compound mutli-input comparator as my invention. There were a few minor differences that were apparently enough to win their own patent for the improvement (cheaper). I have no idea how this was argued in court but probably not involving the discrete circuit design. As I have already conceded Behringer has won this case in court so legally I no longer claim that they are "infringing" on my invention . In addition to that my patent which issued in 1998 will expire soon so then it will be public domain and be free for all to use. As is the law. [/COLOR][/FONT] What people? You... ? it seems I have people supporting me, and people being rude to you. You are not making credible, thoughtful, arguments, but increasingly argumentative and pejorative not to mention fallacious statements. This may be entertaining to some, but it seems a huge waste of my time for me to keep rehashing the same subject over and over. I have no desire to make the modern Behringer company look bad. However I find it difficult to ignore people telling me about me and my history. I was there...I lived my history. You seem like an unusually motivated Behringer advocate, or do I have an equally motivated personal detractor that I do not know about? You are making it hard for me to like you. :-). JR [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Off Topic
The Basement
Copyright, Patent, General Intellectual Property Discussion (Branch from M32 Thread)
Top
Bottom
Sign-up
or
log in
to join the discussion today!
