Meridian Unplugged - Powered by MrTechGuy.co.uk Forums Discussion HiFi & HT Chat The Philosophy of Tweaking Equipment

No "Code" was extracted. It was equivelent to how Meridian changed crossover values a few times (tweaking a few values). It was a few parameters copied from one Meridian product to another Meridian product that had been promised to get it for years. No different than folks changing source labels in DSP speakers, which was JUST AS "ILLEGAL". Bob may have only known for 24hrs. But Meridian had MONTHS of warning. The fact Meridian is BROKEN communication wise was not Erwin's fault. The Wiki page being found early was not an accident . Erwin tried to do the right thing, share it, not profit from it, and not share how he did it to protect Meridian's IP. Folks tried very hard to just get a forcast on an official release of firmware to make Erwin's update moot. But they were too busy. The last message was of the form "it will void your warranty" ... So yeah, "draw your own conclusions".

Whilst we're getting in a few what ifs ....

1) What if Meridian announced that they weren't going to upgrade firmware on old broken products?

2) What if Edwin's firmware was free?

3) What if superior code was written from scratch by another manufacturer and sold?

4) What if none of us had infringed a copyright? From a philosophical point of view, is the world a better or worse case because of software tweaking/ IP infringement?

I'm sure there are more examples then stated in this blog..

http://courseblog.cs.princeton.edu/spring05/cos491/?p=222

Cheers
Tom

Perhaps this might be a better situation than the impasse that appears to now exist with the 568.2mm? The 2.5b9 remains a "broken" beta (how old is this firmware now?) whilst most people agree that the official 2.12 does not sound as good.

And I thought the Pope had abolished limbo...

General questions:

Do you steal stuff if you think you can get away with it?

Do you steal stuff if it seems that most other people are at it?

Do you steal stuff from a friend?

Do you congratulate a friend for audacious theft from another friend?

Do you pass off the issue of theft as the pious moaning of killjoys?

Do you blame the victims of theft for being so feckless as to not take adequate precautions and thereby actually invite the spread of crime?

They are general questions that don't work well in a philosophical debate. Your whole post could have been summarised with the question "Is stealing wrong?" I think a better question would be "Is stealing always wrong?" to which my answer is "no".

Another question could also be, "Is a friend a true friend if you are the only one making the effort to be friends?"

Cheers
Tom

That is a great line !!!

Had a coffee today with our lawyer - not an IP specialist but some experience of IP litigation.

Now this is 1 lawyers view - remember 10 lawyers = 11 differing views.

Usually IP "theft" is taking something from one company and using with another - not the case here. Using IP from one product in a Companies portfolio with another product is much less common and as result case law is pretty weak. The argument ususally comes down to was their actual loss (monetary or reputaional) to the Company and any gain on the part of the other party as a result of this activity. Sometimes it also takes the view of a "casual observer" to the situation rather than a person familiar with every detail.

So would a causal observer be minded to view that owners of "older" products were dissuaded from purchasing "newer" products as a result of this "enhancement", could it be demonstrated the main reason someone was now not choosing to upgrade a 5+ year old product was as the result of this activity.
Reputation damage is a difficult one to call, but given updates had been promised by the Company and not at that time delivered, it could be argued that the activity was an embarasement.

As to gain on the part of the other party - with the original update this is purely reputational. However with the subsequent activity even if this is new developed code - could this have been achieved without the knowledge gained in the first activity. By charging for it then the activity moves to a new level and one that litigation against is likely to favour the Company.

In summary - a casual observer is likely to view the first activity as a so what, but the second activity as being a violation of the companies IP rights.

This is interesting as a few on here have argued that it is the first activity that they find most difficult to accept and that the "home grown filter" is "ok". Now the view here, as I say, is 1 lawyer, based on a quick coffee conversation and assuming the second activity is as a result of knowledge gained through the first.

Apple is not my friend and as soon as they stop making products and improvements that make me happy I will no longer "buy" their products.

BMW, Mercedes, Lexus.... are not my friends I choose to buy whichever I believe fits me best.
Research In Motion is not my friend. Their products no longer please me and my Blackberry has been replaced by the 4S. (BTW how is RIM doing these days).

Regards,
Gary

A police officer, federal agent, lawyer, judge, etc. could most definitely consider stealing to be a crime and such crime will be prosecuted.

I do wish all members a happy holiday season. I have the whole day off so I'm off to BUY (purchase) XMas presents!

No, but I buy stuff, and modify my stuff to make it better.

Nick

Your point being?

I don't think that anyone is upset by you buying parts to substitute in your equipment. We all know the warranty issues and I'm sure you are more than capable of assessing any safety element.

Here is the list of modifications to my G68ADV. Prepare yourself. It is extreme...

1. Replaced stock power supply with a modified Condor SMPS outfitted with Rubycon capacitors and custom rectifier made with SMD ultra fast diodes.
2. Removed IEC filter.
3. Replaced stock clock with Audiocom Superclock 4.
4. Replaced stock op amps with National Semiconductor LME49990 ultra low noise.
5. Added a buffer for ultra low output impedance.
6. Replaced caps on analog output.
7. Replaced key connections with Audio Consulting silver wire
8. Replaced stock RCA outputs with WBT Nextgen connectors.
9. Added 1" isolation feet to reduce heat buildup.
10. Removed the fan.
11. Removed the tuner, zone card, digital out card, and both video cards (the unit now identifies itself as a G68XXV). This was done to reduce heat buildup and to minimize interference.
12. Relocated DSP cards to slots farther away from the analog output.
13. Removed the blue LED lights from front of display.
14. Disconnected power/display button.
15. Changed DSPC file from c00052 to c00044.

This list is insane, I know. In my defense, some of these mods were done to address problems I was having with the G68 (bad power supply, heat buildup, freezing...). The rest were done out of some dark place we probably shouldn't talk about.

As for my philosophy of tweaking... well, that should be obvious.

Bryon