GBluer(Slayer) Exiter

[jbignes5]

Wow.


let me ask a simple question? What does open source mean to you?


In my definition it means to openly develope an idea so that all can benefit from the researched ideas and techniques. If you or anyone Didn't want the idea to be used in an open source way then why come to an open source venue?


There is nothing wrong with anyone taking the idea and improving on that idea and releasing a kit for others to learn from. Isn't that exactly what the open source venue is for?


Teslatronics is doing exactly what the open source venue was designed to do. And he is being very honest with what he plans to do with the proceeds and that is to further the techniques and designs that others have started.


No one has rights to the idea because it was shared openly on this and many other forums. It is public domain and needs to stay that way. As long as Teslatronics doesn't try to get exclusive rights to the design then he is doing nothing wrong with his attempt to further the ideas by releasing a kit for others to learn from and taking the proceeds to further his own research is a damn good way to further this technology.


If Slayer or others feel slighted by this then maybe he shouldn't have brought it to the open source community. Maybe Slayer and others should have protected thier rights by patenting the idea before hand. Oh wait he couldn't because Tesla was the first to have the idea and since his own rights have been in the public domain for tens of years now NO one could patent the device.


Please stop berating the man for taking this to the next level. He is only doing what is natural to the open source community. The only ones making this community look bad is the complainers about this process. If you don't like this method then maybe open source is not your bag.

Here is a definition of open source from open source.org

"1. Free Redistribution
The license shall not restrict any party from selling or giving away the software as a component of an aggregate software distribution containing programs from several different sources. The license shall not require a royalty or other fee for such sale."

Even though this talks about software it is applied to evrything open source. This is a standard amongst the community and it is taken very seriously.

On the home page of this forum it clearly states this is an open source forum so lets keep it in that spirit.

[Billxx]

I come bearing an olive branch, on this public forum- as a sound, reasonable individual (quite possibly for the last time, depending on the next series of responses to this thread).  I wish to reference those individuals who claim to have originated the circuit design, which it seems, all those involved parties really wanted in the first place. More conflict in this situation is not good for this project as a whole.

You make it seem I lurked these forums, found this thread, and off I went. That is obviously not the case.

I actually had Gbluer's videos featured on teslatronix.com until  DE released his brilliant inflammatory masterpiece.

The project will remain on Kickstarter for its life span, thus promoting the name. This can be beneficial for all, and I do wish to give credit where it is due, but this is not possible until individuals with sound judgment come to the right conclusions.

@Teslatronix

Please understand that I'm speaking from the peanut gallery on this issue. Your project on kickstarter may have had greater potential if you had posted your actions first or even approached Slayer007 with a your idea so that he might have had an opportunity to either encourage you or possibly look at it as an opportunity that you could both share and, who knows, Dr Stiffler too. You might have also noticed that Dr. Stiffler also raised an eyebrow over this issue too because both these guys have an actual research interest.

May I ask, and others too may be interested, if there's a possibility that somehow your venture could be somehow able to promote the active research interest by Dr. Stiffler and Slayer007? There may be phases of their research that actually needs funding?

I don't know, the concept of encouraging new interest and giving credit to those actively involved in the actual research and furthering the research seems to be such a great and creative idea, but, it can only be successful if it can be done in a manner that is equitable to all and kudos to those that can come together on it.

Again, I'm only speaking from the peanut gallery of interested learners, we normally don't say much we just enjoy the learning experience.

[ramset]

Jib
I suppose a better question would be what does research mean to you?
open source is the excuse that was used to grab the work of many members here collate it all into an advertising campaign for personal gain and tell the people whose work was being used to go Fu@3 themselves when they tried to explain.


then the same salesman is telling folks contributing at kickstarter that the only place to get this info is to buy it from him and help him with his research?? {NOT ONE MENTION OF THESE OPEN SOURCE COMMUNITIES AND THEIR YEARS OF SELFLESS WORK!!!}


Research involves EXTREMELY benevolent behavior at this level ,it requires tons of effort on absolutely no resources ,a group effort
sometimes with the aid of scientists that share ideas and proprietary information to this benevolent community.


If this is the next level to you [taking the work from a community you never helped in any way and telling them to go F themselves when they try to explain],obviously you are a business man and this makes perfect sense to you.


Thank you for clarifying the profoundly obvious!.


Chet


.

[SeaMonkey]

jbignes5,

You've covered the intent of Open Source
quite accurately.

The concept did originate with computer
programs, or software, in order to make
the "Source Code" freely available to the
World with no restrictions.

The Source Code is written in a high level
computer language which is easily modified
by any who have sufficient skill.  But once
the Source Code is compiled into Machine
Code (Freeware) the program becomes very
difficult to modify or enhance.

The whole purpose of Open Source is to encourage
as many as may be interested to analyze, debug,
innovate and otherwise improve a basic set of ideas.

The Electronics Hobbyist Community has shared
ideas and circuits in a similar manner for decades.
Circuit ideas have been freely disseminated without
any requirement for "credit" or "ownership" or "payback."

Sadly, in this age of instant communication via the
internet, certain experimenters have entered into
the Free Dissemination Community who seem to want
to cling to "ownership" claims or who expect perpetual
"recognition" for some idea.  Ideas, which in nearly every
case, are not truly new or original but re-dos of the work
of others long before.

So the Camp is now divided:

The original group remains dedicated to free
exchange of ideas without any limitations,

and

the new breed who wish to impose limitations
in order to retain "rights" or "claims" to
ownership and recognition.

I suppose it is a classic example of Human Nature.

Some people just do not want to "let go" of what
they consider "theirs."

[ramset]

SeaMonkey


I suppose it boils down to what is at stake,the consequences of the actions?
Here I offer some personal perspective.


One of the things I do with my life is try to help the less fortunate among us,specifically handicapped children and their families.
I have often wanted to enlist the aid of others from this community to help with some of the more specific challenges,  some of this work would have definite commercial value.

The challenge being how to keep people like teslatronics and all his many supporters , from taking this work and running off to start a  "RESEARCH" business?

How does a group perform open source  research and protect it from people like this?


The consequences are far worse in the example of Teslatronics ,To stifle Open source research this way is to  steals from people in this world that can't even get a clean glass of water [5 billion] .
never mind the fact that they have no voice here........


How do you define what is appropriate behavior  when peoples lives actually depend on the work??


I am not talking about getting your video game to get more "lives" or your phone getting more Apps,


We are discussing work that could save lives!!,Change lives!! Truly needy lives !!


Patents, copy rights, fences, at what cost??
nobody here that is actually working to desalinate sea water or bring energy to places that
don't have it,to warm the homes of the less fortunate ,put food on tables where famine and drought
are ravishing the land.


Nobody here working towards that goal gives a hoot about patents and copy rites
Patents have proven to be a waste of time in this venue.
Going for a patent on an OU device is like handing a man a stick to beat you with.


Gotta go..............

Chet