digi2t wrote:False. I did not "show up when this project started". Fact, I never posted anything in this thread until 26 March 2021
that is your opinion more than a true or false. we can both agree it was over a year ago. closer to the beginning than it is to the end. you don't need to be some indignant lawyer about it. sorry I triggered you. I said some things that were not %100 accurate. some of them were true and some of them were my opinions. let's all calm down. no point in arguing about it now.
digi2t wrote:
We've already traced out the 3 and 5 knob versions some time ago. Neither version ever convinced us to be that great of a fuzz, or to be distinct enough to merit adding PCB's to our overhead, so we mothballed the works indefinitely in favor of more interesting projects. Maybe one day we'll revisit it, or maybe not. Who knows. Plenty of more interesting projects to trace out there right now, as my overflowing work bench can attest. If we do decide to make PCB's, then the schematic, as well as any other pertinent information will be released along with the build doc. As we've always done with all our projects.
Regardless, thanks a bunch for the offer.
Cheers,
Dino
I will admit that I did make a mistake in how I remember it. you are right and I was wrong. you did say "maybe" but all I could remember was something else. my fault and I appoligize for spreading misinformation. please understand that this is a mistake by me and not some intentional lie. I honestly can't remember what you said to me over a year ago down to every word. please forgive me?
digi2t wrote:
Well, yes... that does suck. But then again, when you go and make a claim such as this;
eatyourguitar wrote:post pics of the inside please. I like to reverse engineer. I have a way to get it right %100 of the time. I build a full net list by checking continuity from each pad to every other pad. the search space is as big as p*(p-1)/2. this is close to (p^2)/2 which grows like p^2. this is why I want to see how big it is. something with 4 pots, 20 resistors, 4 caps, 2 IC, power = 70 pads. this means I have to check continuity 2415 times. in reality though, it would be 4830 because it is very difficult to skip duplicates. 2415 is only theoretical.
a fuzz face though, that would be 182 tests or 96 in god mode. the difficulty grows fast!
Then why would I bother getting involved. I mean, 100% success rate. Sorry, I can't compete with that. I screw up all the time. Constantly. It's like a disease. I'm afflicted. Screwupitis. No vaccine available. Anyway...
If I wasn't so afraid of failing out of school and losing my financial aid, I would not have enlisted the help of others to do my job. If I fail school, I lose financial aid. if I lose financial aid I go back to living in a tent in winter. the cold weather makes my knees hurt. I am very grateful for jonwayne volunteering to help me when I needed it the most. I thought it was the perfect solution. the problem with that is that my success rate goes out the window. I can't control what other people do. I also can't fire them if they work for free. but I can't step in and do it myself if I am busy with school. I was repeating the same class after I failed it when they switched to online learning during covid. I got a waiver to stay in school. I switched my priorities around so I was deciding to put school first.
digi2t wrote:
eatyourguitar wrote:
I tried to explain to you that if I am already agreeing to non-compete with you, and I am bankrupt in the pedal business, what is the harm in helping me help the guy who has been waiting over a year for his pedal? you just ghost my email no reply? that is pretty messed up that you swoop in to look like the hero when you never cared about OP the whole time. all you cared about was proprietary, competition, and profit.
First and foremost, we don't compete with anyone. I've said it before, and I'll say it again, for Phil and myself, this is a hobby. We both have very good jobs, and by no means do we monetarily depend on DEFX in any way shape or form. The day we get bored with it, or it begins to feel like a chore, we will shut it down in a heartbeat, and not bat an eyelash. As for not caring about the OP (ibarakishi), trust me, if we really didn't give a shit, then we wouldn't have gotten involved.
Yes, I did ghost his email to the deadendfx site (26 March 2021), which read...
what are you rambling on about? you claim that you were the first person to trace it but you decided to withold it and keep it proprietary to increase your bottom line for your business. if that is not true then why not share it? to say that you have another job that pays the bills is irrelavent. what difference does that make? if anything you would be more inclined to share the schematic if you have a day job and the pcb business is not intended to be profitable. you said you don't want to share something that is not verified. does that mean you never traced it or you don't know if you traced it correctly? why not post it with a disclaimer? this is really not adding up. people post schematics with errors all the time. the community has a high tolerance for traced pedals posted with errors. are you a perfectionist?
digi2t wrote:
Yes, I did ghost his email to the deadendfx site (26 March 2021), which read...
--------------------------------------------------------
From: Robert Smith (
onlywearblack@gmail.com)
The following message was sent using your Big Cartel contact form at
http://www.deadendfx.com/contact
I think we talked before when you said you traced the infanem driving notion on your own before I attempted it. I am now in a bad spot. there were some errors on my schematic that I traced as a project with jonwayne on ILF. The pedal was deconstructed into pieces so that has been destroyed. There are still details of my schematic that I believe are incorrect or unconfirmed. I feel really bad that I owe someone a guitar pedal and now that I am completely out of business, I want to end on a good note not burning the guy who donated his INFANEM pedal for tracing.
I am desperate so I thought I would ask you once again if you would share the schematic that you worked hard in tracing. I know you said it is proprietary but I am not competing with you now as a business and you are also not selling the driving notion so maybe you could let me see the schematic you have for it? pretty please?
--------------------------------------------------------end email
digi2t wrote:
First of all, the schematic is not proprietary, definitely not in the sense conveyed here. The circuit, as with the schematic, is the intellectual property of INFANEM. Second, and this one really gets to me, why in heavens's sake would someone destroy a perfectly good pedal to trace it? I'm sorry if this sounds flippant, but it's not even that tough of a trace. Yes, the traces are confusing because of the routing, and some SMD parts can be a pain to define, but then again, I've traced some of the later Spaceman pedals that are not only SMD, but have all the traces sandwiched between the two outer pours. Finally, the work we put into a project is our own, regardless of the circumstances. Yes, that is proprietary. Granted, I didn't breadboard the Notion until recently, but quite frankly, why would we share anything that hasn't been validated, or that we're not 100% confident in?
this smells like bullshit or maybe you don't know the law with ragards to copyright, trademark, trade dress, circuits and schematics. lets not conflate trademark and copyright. circuits themselves as a concept hold no copyright because they are not copyrightable. the drawing that you make is your copyright automatically regardless if it was traced from an authentic INFANEM pedal. you can not say that it is a schematic of an INFANEM pedal since you do not own the trademark INFANEM although this is arguable. you can say "look at this drawing of a schematic I made. I think it sounds a lot like the INFANEM pedal I was looking at". this is your protected free speech and your copyrighted drawing. if you are claiming that the copyright of the drawing of the schematic that you have belongs to INFANEM then you are in possession of copyrighted material yourself. If you have in your possession a drawing created and copyrighted by INFANEM that you are not legally entitled to copy then you have already infringed INFANEM's copyright. so again you are either bullshitting us or you don't even know what you are talking about with respect to the law. either you own it or INFANEM owns it. if you got your hands on INFANEM's official drawing directly from INFANEM, then you would be in possesion of the %100 accurate verified circuit which also means that you never traced it. so you either lied about tracing it or you told the truth about tracing it and you somehow how think that your copyrighted drawing is property of someone else (it isn't) and you think that circuits are copyrightable (they aren't). INFANEM owns the name INFANEM. they can have trademark litigation against both of us for using the name to promote the sale of PCB's that are not affiliated with or endoresed by INFANEM in any way. probably this won't happen but if it does it won't affect me because of my financial situation I am what lawyers call "judgement proof". like blood from a stone.
digi2t wrote:
Also, just to digress for a moment, remember the original PM that he sent to me on 10 March 2020? Well, it didn't take too long before he was whining about it in this thread. Just a few hours after my reply to his PM, I saw this;
eatyourguitar wrote:I just found out people have already traced it before me but they do not share
don't worry. I will post everything for all to see. I will be selling PCB's. no one is selling PCB's right now. if they did they would need to release the schematic as well. if you hear anything on that please forward the link to me so that I can stop before I start.
Quite frankly, I just didn't know what to make of this. Was it a complaint? Was it an attempt at enticement? Some sort of guilt trip message? I don't know. I knew precisely who it was aimed at, but I simply decided to take a pass.
I told the truth. you got your feelings hurt. was it because you spoke to me in private and I talked about it on the internet without mentioning your name at all? I intentionally did not say your name. this was clearly not a personal attack. if you wanted a different outcome you should have made different choices. do what you want. don't blame me for your regrets. you doxed my real name without permission. ILF should already ban you for that. the essence of my statement is that although there are people here on ILF that have the means to help us with this project, because they apparently do not support the open source community, we or I will have to do everything ourselves even if it means duplicated efforts. the result will be that open source defeats closed source. my idea to share the schematic for free is unstoppable because I own any drawing I make. if that devalues someone's proprietary work that was basically a for profit cloning business I really don't care. I will solve that problem my self even if I make no money doing it. I love this hobby or at least I did. not so sure anymore.
in closing, I'm pretty much done with this thread, done helping people on ILF. done with ILF. done with trying to do any kind of business with guitar pedals. it looks like the project is in good hands now. if an improved schematic should appear then I will finish the build and send it off to OP sometime in the summer when school is on summer break. good luck with the project no sarcasm intended.
