if I make a microcontroller or any electronic device and it has LEDs, it is not me who created these LEDs, I bought them, even chosen for the pack of transistors that I bought on Amazon, so if I want to market a device that uses these LEDs and transistors, do I pay copyright to the author / brand of these LEDs too? And what if I buy a ready-made Wi-Fi card or SIM card reader that I buy and integrate into my device, must I pay copyright also?
-
12Note that aside from these concerns, you may need UL or similar safety certification, and you're responsible for ensuring that you meet EMI/RFI limits. – chrylis -cautiouslyoptimistic- Nov 01 '21 at 21:07
-
The complete product you make from those off-the- shelf components could conceivably infringe a patent. There is no problem if you put the parts in a bag and resell them but a product made by integrating them could infringe one or more random patents unrelated to any patents on the individual parts. – George White Nov 01 '21 at 22:57
-
19Physical utilitarian products generally don't have copyrights, unless they are manifestations of creative expression. The design of the product could be copyrighted but that would be a problem for people who copy the product's design - not people who just use the product. (I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice). Even CDs and books, which are copyrighted, are generally allowed to be re-sold without copying. – user253751 Nov 02 '21 at 09:59
-
19OMG, the scourge that is IP, has really spilled over from the software world and become infectious. Thirty years ago, nobody making hardware would even have conceived of this question. – Glen Yates Nov 02 '21 at 14:27
-
3Have you found any manufacturers of LEDs or transistors who assert copyright protection on their products? Is there any line of reasoning you can think of in which including an LED or a transistor in a product requires making a copy of the LED or transistor? – phoog Nov 02 '21 at 16:22
-
4@chrylis-cautiouslyoptimistic- already mentioned it in technical terms, but I feel the need to insist. The IP is not your primary concern, but the certifications. Any electronic device emits radio and you must be sure that those waves are exactly according to regulations before selling anything. – Andrei Nov 02 '21 at 17:25
-
2@GlenYates Similar to how patents were supposed to protect your ability to not get scooped by your competitors to market... not to guarantee a monopoly for hundreds of years! – corsiKa Nov 02 '21 at 20:16
-
2Patent and copyrights would only be relevant if you're trying to manufacture the LED/microcontroller yourself based on existing LED/microcontroller design. If you're manufacturing a bigger device using those parts, that's more akin to linking rather than copying. – Lie Ryan Nov 02 '21 at 22:32
-
@LieRyan Software analogies don't work for this. The software “linking” rules are bespoke, from software licenses; if they're in law, it's only in recent laws. – wizzwizz4 Nov 03 '21 at 15:58
-
1@corsiKa - patents have a term of twenty years (possibly with some time added for delays caused by the USPTO) from the date of filing - thee is no "hundreds of years". – George White Nov 04 '21 at 01:30
-
@LieRyan - The OP might build a system from those sourced parts that infringes one or more patents from third parties unrelated to the makers of the parts. – George White Nov 04 '21 at 01:32
-
1@GlenYates - you have it backwards. Hardware patents have spilled over to software. Software related patents are new, not hardware patents. Controversy over software patents might have introduce you to IP but hardware has been patented since Thomas Jefferson set up the first patent office. – George White Nov 04 '21 at 01:35
-
1@GeorgeWhite Forgive the hyperbole. Even 20 years is far too long. Although IP laws in general, like copywrite, is ridiculous. 75 years or more to protect IP? Heck no - you should get maybe 5 years to establish yourself on the market, and if someone else uses your characters to write a better story than you did, too bad. Step up your game. – corsiKa Nov 04 '21 at 08:33
-
An LED or a transistor by itself is a completely useless object - a little bit of metal, silicon, plastic and semi-conductors that doesn't do anything on its own. Their single, solitary purpose is to be installed into a larger product. It is thus expected that any such component that is purchased is intended to be used as part of a larger product. If you built a house, would you have to pay copyright fees to the company that made the nails? – Darrel Hoffman Nov 04 '21 at 15:17
-
@corsiKa - I agree that copyright lasts a very long time. But it isn’t just derivative works but the original that would be free after your five years. Anyone can show your movie, or print thousands or copies of your book without compensating you. – George White Nov 04 '21 at 15:24
-
@GeorgeWhite And that is precisely the flaw that exists. You perhaps (perhaps!) shouldn't be able to just print my book as your own. But you should be able to use my characters after a reasonable amount of time. As it stands it is all or nothing, which is a Bad Thing. – corsiKa Nov 04 '21 at 16:17
-
Might be a good idea if you could draw a clean line between those two cases. It might be very hard. – George White Nov 04 '21 at 18:40
-
@GeorgeWhite Except that I wasn't talking about patents in specific, but IP in general. Not until the rise of software licensing would somebody have thought that one would have to purchase a right to use a physical item that they have already bought. – Glen Yates Nov 04 '21 at 23:02
8 Answers
Under the First Sale doctrine, when intellectual property is imparted to an actual physical thing, the first commercial buyer of that actual physical thing (that is made with proper intellectual property licensing or permission) is entitled to use it without further intellectual property limitations. As Wikipedia explains at the link:
The first-sale doctrine (also sometimes referred to as the "right of first sale" or the "first sale rule") is an American legal concept that limits the rights of an intellectual property owner to control resale of products embodying its intellectual property. The doctrine enables the distribution chain of copyrighted products, library lending, giving, video rentals and secondary markets for copyrighted works (for example, enabling individuals to sell their legally purchased books or CDs to others). In trademark law, this same doctrine enables reselling of trademarked products after the trademark holder puts the products on the market. In the case of patented products, the doctrine allows resale of patented products without any control from the patent holder.
A different analysis applies if the goods when first made were already infringing. But, in practice, the aggrieved IP owner usually sues the primary infringer or an importer of the infringing goods, rather than a retail purchaser, in those case.
- 211,353
- 14
- 403
- 716
-
2That "usually" in the last paragraph is key—some bad actors won't follow that: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/01/notorious-scan-to-email-patents-go-big-sue-coca-cola-and-dillards/ – lights0123 Nov 01 '21 at 21:02
-
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat. – feetwet Nov 03 '21 at 21:21
As someone who designs electronics for a living, this is my experience.
It's common practice in the electronics industry to buy parts and then use them in designs without paying anything other than the cost of the part itself. This applies to simple parts like resistors, capacitors, LEDs, transistors, diodes, etc. It also applies to things like entire circuit boards or modules that one might connect together.
There are some exceptions. For example, certain pieces of hardware are meant to be used with certain protocols, IP, or address spaces. Technically you are not paying for use of the hardware itself. But for practical purposes its just about the same as if you were, since without paying, can't use the hardware for its intended purpose.
For example a CAN bus transceiver is meant to be used with the CAN bus protocol, which is owned by Bosch GmbH. Each implementation using that protocol is obligated to pay a royalty to Bosch. If you use a chip which contains a CAN bus controller the cost of the royalty is included with the controller chip, but if you made your own implementation (say in an FPGA) you would need to pay the royalty.
Ethernet and WIFI products require a MAC address. MAC addresses are assigned by the IEEE and a small fee must be paid for each one. If you buy a complete functioning Ethernet or WIFI module that already has a MAC address, then the manufacturer already paid for the MAC address. If you are making your own implementation, out of say a MAC-PHY chip, which doesn't come with a factory programmed MAC address, then you would need to either buy a small MAC address EEPROM (which has the cost of the MAC address included) or else buy MAC addresses directly from IEEE.
If you want to sell electronics in the US then it needs to comply with FCC regulations. This is typically accomplished by testing at a certified lab (which can cost several thousand dollars). Certain product categories are exempt from testing, for example products that run at very low clock frequencies, or are completely passive.
You would also be required to meet any safety standards. In the US this is typically accomplished by testing at certified labs like UL or Intertek.
-
note that (AFAIK) you also have the option of just making up a MAC address and hoping it doesn't conflict with any other computer on the network. Nobody will like you, especially not network administrators trying to find out why the printer stopped working. – user253751 Nov 03 '21 at 17:47
-
1@user253751 Speaking as a network administrator: If I catch a product doing that, the manufacturer goes on the blacklist. If they are willing to cut that corner they can't be trusted with anything else either. We will not buy anything from that company again. Any pending orders will be cancelled. Any existing items we have from them will be under severe scrutiny and will in most cases be replaced early regardless of their planned lifecycle. In my 30 years in IT this has happened 3x. Not recently though. Last time was in 2004. Seems most manufacturers have learned not to do that anymore. – Tonny Nov 04 '21 at 11:50
No, the manufacturer will be paying for any patent licenses, copyright, etc. and it's all included in the price that you are paying.
The exception would be if someone rips off the patent holder and builds say LEDs without paying for a patent license that they should pay for. But in that case, the patent holder would take the manufacturer to court who made a million LEDs, and not you when you bought twenty of them.
- 34,028
- 2
- 46
- 88
Everything you sell needs to meet safety standards for the jurisdiction you are selling it in. Not every product has safety standards, but many do.
The certification will inspect every part of your product including the components. As such, the cheapest way to get a certification is to use components that themselves have been pre-certified. An example of that is the "RU" recognition provided by UL. The certifier will not test those components, because they are already tested, so you will not pay for testing them.
Companies which seek such component certifications want you to use them in products; that was the entire point of certification! So yes, there is no question in that case.
Most of the cheap Amazon crud is straight off Alibaba.com and has no certifications of any kind. If you use it, IP rights will be the least of your problems.
Or maybe not. Maybe the cheapo builder violated somebody else's patent. So out of the blue, this patent holder could come after you. (Simply because you are within their reach). Generally not an issue with white-market goods.
- 19,563
- 2
- 27
- 81
-
-
@NeilMeyer I'm talking about Amazon stuff that came off Alibaba. Because I understand how the regulatory apparatus works in North America and Europe, and almost everything on Amazon is far from compliance; that's why it's not on Mouser or bricks-and-mortar retail. Remember, Amazon Marketplace is basically eBay. I'm sure it's possible to get RU-recognized stuff on Alibaba, but you better know what you're doing. – Harper - Reinstate Monica Nov 03 '21 at 19:27
-
Whether from Alibaba or aliexpress or bangood, you will be hard pressed to find any sort of consumer electronics components not manufactured in China. IDK were exactly you expect Amazon to source electronic components from? – Neil Meyer Nov 03 '21 at 19:31
-
@NeilMeyer It's not a location-of-manufacture issue. Don't confuse my statement with some sort of nationalism or anti-nationalism. It's a "was it certified to standards or was it not?" issue. It's perfectly legal to make non-certified stuff in the US or Europe, but you won't be selling it in North America or Europe if you do (except on Amazon LOL), and you'll be within reach of enforcement if you try. – Harper - Reinstate Monica Nov 03 '21 at 19:32
-
A UL or other certification is not generally a legal requirement to sell a product in the U.S. See https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/10639/is-ul-approval-required-on-all-items-sold-in-the-usa – George White Nov 04 '21 at 01:24
-
@GeorgeWhite Yet stores like Home Depot, Walmart and Costco, who infamously min-max for cheapness and profit, refuse to sell the stuff. Isn't that surprising? Clearly something with great force is in the way. I never said "legal", but on that point... don't disregard NEC as "not a law". The way NEC works is state legislatures write a bill "NEC 2017 shall be the law of our land" and the governor signs it. – Harper - Reinstate Monica Nov 04 '21 at 02:23
-
@Harper - Reinstate Monica Maybe we agree. It is true that it will be hard to sell electronics in the U.S. through a respectable channel without UL. That it is generally illegal to sell such a thing is not true. Quote from a firm that helps get UL listing "There is no law in the U.S. requiring UL certification. But commercial building and electrical codes as well as retailers may require it. And if you produce a product designed to meet specific safety criteria or it might pose a safety risk, you definitely need testing". https://www.petra.com/blog/do-i-need-ul-certification-for-my-product/ – George White Nov 04 '21 at 02:24
-
1@GeorgeWhite Yeah, I suspect the real truth is it's a web of things not literally written into statute, like NEC or Federal regulations (Congress makes laws that authorize regulatory agencies to write regs and enforce them), municipalities holding you up on permits (back to NEC 110.2), case law, and insurers refusing to protect manufacturers, distributors and retailers from suits relating to faulty products, etc. – Harper - Reinstate Monica Nov 04 '21 at 02:28
Apart from anything else you don't have to pay for copyright permission on those devices because you're not making copies of them. Copyright is essentially the right to make copies.
- 892
- 7
- 15
-
1The OP is talking about physical things like LEDs. Copyright is for documents, recordings, etc. If he were making "copies" of them it would potentially be a patent law not remotely related to copyright unless he provided copies of the datasheets. – George White Nov 04 '21 at 01:19
Those components are sold to be included in other products, whether those products are created for sale or not is irrelevant.
Or do you think you'd have to pay intellectual property rights to the paper mill over a pack of printer paper you use to print the monthly newsletter of your local sportsclub?
- 491
- 3
- 6
The IP inherent in these is embedded in the process of making them. You've simply bought the items. As a user, no IP has entered the conversation and therefore the question simply doesn't arise.
If you attempted to make more WiFi cards using their circuit board design, this would be infringement of their IP. But you aren't, so it isn't.
- 2,711
- 10
- 14
Components are generally consumable, your labeling is going to be the issue, and you mention microcontrollers specifically, so the usual Open Source caveats apply, and you could be hounded for that.
So, do not infringe on trademarks. Try not to clone products that are still patent protected, and especially watch copyright as well as it tends to outlive patents.
Beware of licensed product. You cannot necessarily "chip" consoles and call them a derivative work if you are doing it to pirate games. Playing out of region DVD's may be OK though. Don't be deceptive, if it does not save fuel and you claim it does there will be trouble. Likewise do not print 800W PSU labels and use them on 400W units.
But otherwise you should be fine, get over to Tindie and see what they have to say on the matter. At the end of the day everything is made my someone, and unless you are Rolex (tm), my guess is you will never be making everything in-house.
Those LEDs were made to be used in something.
- 193
- 5