Ok then answer my questions I posted instead of ignoring them. Show me the evidence that any civil or criminal case can be made against me for something you think I did. You can't point to anything because it doesn't exist.You clearly don't respect another creators intellectual Property.
Your opinion. Whatever. Filling up the thread with an off-topic rant.It is clear by the fact that you are despairly trying to find a legal loophole and get others to bear the cost of your out of control case of gearlust.
Are you speaking morally or legally? Right to repair is not the same thing as educational fair use. But you still haven't answered the question of what IP you think I have infringed. Is it copyright? Trademark? Patent law? Tell us your expert opinion. I don't know how to respond to such an incoherent argument that conflates moral with legal, right to repair with educational fair use. What exactly does "NO" mean without any context, and who has said that to me? I am college educated in criminal law and ethics. I work in engineering. I know the ethics of engineering because I studied it. In short most of that has to do with telling lies, breaking the law, breach of contract, and participating in the creation of unsafe products. I don't agree that I have done anything unethical.If you want to reverse engineer for "right to repair" or your own learning/growth that's one thing... but sharing your findings with others (even if free) after being told NO is flat out unethical and you know it.
Should we ban anyone who mentions the retailers who support Behringer because those businesses are unethical? Should be we ban users who own Behringer modules because those users are unethical for supporting Behringer? Should we ban people who support the people who support Behringer? You can claim anything is unethical but I think it is something that will be debated so lets just stick to the law. This is not a thread about philosophy.There's plenty of things that are legal but unethical.
Anything good that could come from this would not exist if people like you were to be made to rule over us. In the United States we have laws that protect intellectual property. The laws are not subjective. They are not based on emotions or what is trendy in philosophy. The laws are there to delineate what is in the interest of property owners while balancing that with the public good. I think the laws we have do a good job of that. I'm good with the laws I'm just not interested in hearing your opinion about what is right or wrong. I would rather have the laws we have now than anything you could create on your own by yourself.Hopefully, any knowledge you find will be leveraged in a manner that leads to advancement of the craft/technology and not just a clone with minor alterations.
This is in fact false. I have read the forum rules on intellectual property and I have not yet broken them. If you have any evidence that I have broken the rules please show the evidence. The rules mention "infringement". This is vital because I asked you about it and you ignored my question.Your comments in this thread show you aren't even willing to stay complaint to the ModWiggler forum's rules on intellectual property.
I think it would be better if you don't speak for other people. They can speak for themselves. Are you the representative of someone with standing?You turned this thread from a "petition" to a "I didn't get my way so I'm going to crowdsource a disapproved clone against the creator's wishes".
Trying to sound smart talking about international law but you haven't answered any of my questions about it in my first response to you. In context this is a joke. You can't point to a single law that has been broken but you still come back to this thread to show off how much you know about the law while talking about ethics. There is no substance. Nothing that makes me think you have any good knowledge on the subject.I'm glad you at least had the sense to get a lawyer. Hopefully for your sake, they are versed in international and Japanese laws because all those legal protections vary by country and various countries often recognize the legal protections in each other's jurisdictions.
again this is a joke. YOU clearly have no idea what public domain is. Let me show you something written by a lawyer.You clearly don't know the difference between Open Source and Public Domain either.
"such works include intentional dedication to Public Domain by the creator"
source:
https://fordham.libguides.com/copyright/Licensing
And in case you didn't read or comprehend anything I wrote previously, I can create a drawing. That drawing is my intellectual property. I can do whatever I want with that work. In that context I am the creator.
Statistics: Posted by EATyourGUITAR — Sun Feb 02, 2025 9:57 pm