downhill_biker Posted June 18, 2009 Share Posted June 18, 2009 I know that I am looking for a controller, and know that several others are, and I was just going to put out a feeler and see who may be interested in doing a group buy. We dont know pricing, or who we will get them from. This is just a feeler. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tigerv503 Posted June 18, 2009 Share Posted June 18, 2009 check out the Digital Aquatics L1 its on sale right now. I would go with the L2 it provides more functions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
downhill_biker Posted June 18, 2009 Author Share Posted June 18, 2009 check out the Digital Aquatics L1 its on sale right now. I would go with the L2 it provides more functions. You mean the ReefKeeper Lite? Ya they are on sale for $99 right now, but the base model doesn't have much. The RK Lite (Lvl 3) is $270-ish, which is what the Aquacontroller Jr. costs. Besides you can connect the AC Jr. to the internet using a free program on Reef Central. Just checking interest. The $99 RK Lite has no pH probe or serial port. it also only has 4 plugs, instead of 8. They are very comparable, but the free internet software on RC sold me, so I thought I would see who else is interested. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy Posted June 18, 2009 Share Posted June 18, 2009 Free internet software for the ACjr? Do tell... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rugbyfish Posted June 18, 2009 Share Posted June 18, 2009 Free internet software for the ACjr? Do tell... What?...sweet, yes, do tell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
downhill_biker Posted June 18, 2009 Author Share Posted June 18, 2009 ok, i'll spill the beans... here is the website. this guy is thinking about writing a program for the RK Lite, but so far just has it for the AC Jr. http://sites.google.com/site/acserial2web/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoseCityAquarium Posted June 18, 2009 Share Posted June 18, 2009 Just so everyone knows, there has been a price decrease in the reefkeeper lite. They are not on sale, $99 is the msrp. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 ok, i'll spill the beans... here is the website. this guy is thinking about writing a program for the RK Lite, but so far just has it for the AC Jr. http://sites.google.com/site/acserial2web/ Has anyone used this yet? I have downloaded it and it looks very cool just don't know how to post the info on the web? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason7504 Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 im interested but hopefully its not for a little so i can find some money lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
impur Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 I'm going to do that program this weekend. Will be nice for when i'm on vacation Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krux Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 Cool program, but wouldn't be surprised if this guy gets a C&D letter as he apears to be circumventing the IP of AC. Get it now just in case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
downhill_biker Posted June 19, 2009 Author Share Posted June 19, 2009 He has posted it on RC in many, many threads and hasn't had problems yet. I am not saying he wont, but it isn't like he is hiding it. If he does get in trouble hopefully it is after I get my controller and download the software. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason7504 Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 I'm going to do that program this weekend. Will be nice for when i'm on vacation ur doing the Group buy this weekend? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krux Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 He has posted it on RC in many' date=' many threads and hasn't had problems yet. I am not saying he wont, but it isn't like he is hiding it. If he does get in trouble hopefully it is after I get my controller and download the software.[/quote'] It wouldn't be a problem for them until they see a dramatic drop off in sales of NET equipped models. All they would do is tell him to stop hosting it for download if anything. From what I can tell, they haven't made their code open source, so it should be within their rights. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 How so? How is he violating their IP? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 I downloaded it... But now I'm not sure hope post it to the internet??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
downhill_biker Posted June 19, 2009 Author Share Posted June 19, 2009 ur doing the Group buy this weekend? no, no, miles already has the controller, and he is downloading the program. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
downhill_biker Posted June 19, 2009 Author Share Posted June 19, 2009 I downloaded it... But now I'm not sure hope post it to the internet??? I am not sure either. I am not a tech guy, maybe KRUX would know. If not there are threads on RC you can search for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krux Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 How so? How is he violating their IP? Essentially hacking their product via software to allow it to function without the additional product that they sell to make such features available. If they had designed the software platform to be open source they would have forfeited their right to keep their product functioning as sold, but as it is he created a work around to deny them sales, and is openly distributing it to people. They own the rights to controlling internet functionality within their product, it is up to them to determine if it is worth maintaining exclusivity to those features, or if they just want to let it go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 None of that is violating Neptune's IP -- it's clearly fair use. If what you described was true, there'd be no third party software available for any proprietary hardware. No Songbird or Anapod for iPods, no Nikon or Canon photoshop plug-ins, no high-end scanner drivers, no tools for loading custom ringtones into phones etc. Companies like Apple and Nikon are a *lot* more protective of their IP than Neptune ever could be. As long as he isn't using Neptune's MFC class libraries (and he clearly isn't since his tool is written in Java) he's got nothing to worry about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krux Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 None of that is violating Neptune's IP -- it's clearly fair use. If what you described was true' date=' there'd be no third party software available for any proprietary hardware. No Songbird or Anapod for iPods, no Nikon or Canon photoshop plug-ins, no high-end scanner drivers, no tools for loading custom ringtones into phones etc. As long as he isn't using Neptune's MFC class libraries (and he clearly isn't since his tool is written in Java) he's got nothing to worry about.[/quote'] I think you are confusing a workaround for a marketable function of a product, and addon for features not supported or offered by the vendor. IP laws protect the inventor and owner allowing them monopoly profits as a financial incentive to allow for recoup of development costs as well as future research. While his work is free to download, it is denying them profits based on sales of protected functionality. By your example: Songbird, an open source, linux based free music player was developed to replace... nothing that anyone was charging for, anapod as a player to run on a device to replace free software already integrated into it (i.e. not unlocking features that the base code of an ipod sells as an up-charge), officially unsupported plugins for photoshop for cameras with no interest or income based on selling them, drivers for scanners that the hardware manufacturers choose not to code and provide, as there is no financial return in doing so... you get the picture. I am not going to quote the entire body of work, but you will find pages and pages of recognized international explanation on industrial property, patents, inventor protection, and the rights and limitations of the owner to exclude others from creating, distributing and marketing similar, tangential, or ancillary products. http://www.wipo.int/freepublications/en/intproperty/895/wipo_pub_895.pdf I am not a patent attorney, but having researched a very similar circumstance as this in the past as my own way to make millions, and having been told by someone who WAS that it is in violation, with the above mentioned reasons cited, I am going to go with the professional on this one. Not that it is going to make a lick of difference to me, or you, or anyone here. I could be totally wrong, but my source is actually a patent lawyer, and they tend to know more about this sort of stuff than I do. Companies like Apple and Nikon are a *lot* more protective of their IP than Neptune ever could be. I am pretty sure that if you write a program that you can stick on an sd card that plugs into your entry model camera, that unlocks features that are intentionally locked unless you upgrade, and then post all over the internet about it, eventually Nikon is going to come knocking and ask you to take it down. You could write it in Turbo BASIC and they still wouldn't care. The man always gots ta get paid Let me reiterate though that I could be totally WRONG in which case I should run out and start marketing my idea for a network controlled dosing system via an ancient belkin router that I can run from a blackberry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 The program for the ACjr isn't unlocking anything or modifying the ACjr at all -- in fact, it's replacing Neptune system's crappy AquaNotes software in exactly the same way Songbird replaces iTunes (and Apple could very easily demonstrate financial damages from that replacement if they were motivated to). Many companies have tried to apply the DMCA to prevent this kind of competition precisely because it is clearly fair use. If it wasn't covered by FU, they wouldn't have to resort to bogus DMCA claims -- they'd just pursue IP claims. Of course, this has almost nothing to do with the actual topic at hand... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krux Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 iTunes is not something that is sold, it is distributed as rampantly as antitrust laws will allow to spur sales from the itunes store... Many companies have tried to apply the DMCA to prevent this kind of competition precisely because it is clearly fair use. If it wasn't covered by FU, they wouldn't have to resort to bogus DMCA claims -- they'd just pursue IP claims. Of course, this has almost nothing to do with the actual topic at hand... See I would argue this as from what I can tell this is CLEARLY NOT fair use. In federal copyright law 17 U.S.C. §§101 et seq., refers to specific use of copyrighted materials without payment of royalties or which otherwise does not constitute an infringement of copyright; permitted use by copying and acknowledgment; refers to a "privilege in others than the owner of a copyright to use the copyrighted material in a reasonable manner without his consent, notwithstanding the monopoly granted to the owner [by the copyright]." 366 F. 2d 303, 306. Whether a use is considered a fair use depends upon the purpose and character of the use, the nature of the copyrighted work, the amount and substantiality of the portion used, and the effect of the use upon the market value of the copyright. Important factors include whether the copied material was creative or research-oriented; the status of the user (reviewer, scholar, compiler, parodist); extent of use (both qualitatively and quantitatively); the absence of an intent to plagiarize as evidenced by proper acknowledgment; the original contribution of the user. See Kaplan & Brown, Copyright 309-351 (4th ed. 1985). The doctrine was originally judge-made in an effort to balance the economic incentives to creators of copyrighted works and the dissemination of those works to the public. 422 U.S. 151, 156. It was codified in the Copyright Act of 1976 and in its statutory form restated the language of the case law. 17 U.S.C. §107. It has been held that the fair use codification by Congress was not intended to depart from court-created principles and use factors developed in case law to determine fair use defense. 207 U.S.P.Q. 977; 542 F. Supp. 1156. The bold part demonstrates that the software makes the patented apex module and copyright protected software on it completely valueless... that's where I personally see fair use falling apart. He is not using copyrighted material in a manner that is reasonable, he has created his OWN material that circumvents the built in limitations of the invention which require additional purchases to achieve the same ends. This replaces the Apex module, which is simply a box with connectivity software on a rom chip plugged into it which they sell independently as the ONLY way to access the controller from the internet. Maybe I need to read more and then have you explain it to me over a beer to understand your perspective, but I simply don't see a copyright workaround (fair use) as being a way to get around industrial property protection on a physical patent Back to the sweet deal at hand! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 Ok, I can't walk away from a good argument... :-D The quote you've got there doesn't relate to the situation we're talking about. If I said "The guy with the replacement ACjr software *can* use and distribute Neptune's MFC libraries 'cuz it's Fair Use" then that particular bit of legalese would apply.. the guy would be attempting to use another's copywrited work inappropriately. The serial interface to the ACjr isn't a copywrited work... in fact, it's quite the opposite, it's an open standard. The protocol used over that serial port isn't copywrited work either, it's straight ascii -- another open standard. There isn't any IP there to infringe upon. Here's my last example, promise. There are several open source replacement firmware packages (Tomato, for example) for a large variety of consumer-grade wifi routers. These packages grant features normally found in $1500 professional-grade routers to the POS Linksys you can buy at Best Buy for $50. If Cisco could shut these projects down, they would in a hot second -- but they can't, because there is no IP violation. Same thing here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krux Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 THAT makes sense! I need a bit more convincing in another thread (if Cisco sold adapters to plug into your Linksys in line to get these results, and distributed them exclusively through Linksys, I would see that as the same argument as far as tomato creating a software workaround for a physical object) but the discussion has been fun! Either way this beats a RK with NET module hands down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.