Re: BX24-AHT code snippet

[nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxx (Dave Houston)]

You are making a serious charge which cannot be supported by any facts. I
used different hardware and different code. I did not use any elements of
your design nor did I use any of your "basic" code. You cannot claim a
concept or idea as intellectual property but only the specific expression of
an idea.

The following quote is from the U.S. Copyright Office web site at...

http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ61.html#points

<quote>
EXTENT OF COPYRIGHT PROTECTION

Copyright protection extends to all of the copyrightable expression embodied
in the computer program. Copyright protection is not available for ideas,
program logic, algorithms, systems, methods, concepts, or layouts.
</quote>

There were several people involved in a general discussion of an all
housecode transceiver in CHA. I believe I was the one who initiated those
discussions and recall that Dan Lanciani, Brian Karas, Guy Lavoie and others
were involved. It's all a matter of public record.

The NEC protocol had been in use for many years prior to this. It was very
popular with Asian manufacturers of AV gear. In addition to NEC's datasheets
for their chips there were and are several web sites that give details of
the protocol including code in various languages for various processors
(e.g. Atmel AVR, PIC). X-10's documentation for the CM17A included the two
payload bytes for all the standard X-10 codes.

I merely stated there were errors in the data on the Cheung site. I did not
claim I discovered such errors. As I recall, Dan Lanciani mentioned that
there were errors in an email but he did not point out any specific errors.
I decided it was simpler to just start from scratch.

I made no use of anything that could be considered your "intellectual
property" and can prove that in court. I suggest you learn a bit about what
is and is not "intellectual property" before recklessly accusing someone of
something so serious.

"tomapowa" <tom2@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>HI Dave,
>I'm unsure who you are "strenuosly" disagreeing with but in any case, I
>think the writing's on the wall.
>
>When I mentioned, "decoding scheme", I was referrring to the "basic"
>code required to decode the RF stream.  Did you really think I was
>talking about the all encompassing X-10 RF coding ?   I know I've been
>away for a while but,... lets be serious now.  I also put a lot of
>effort into documenting/commenting my code.  To me, the comments are
>worth more than the code itself.  If you were to look at it, you will
>see I pointed out an error in previous decoding documenation (did I
>hear you say you were the one that found this error?).
>
> You might have been messing with Ming receivers well before I started
>my Whole house transceiver projects but from what I can remember, I was
>the first to come up with the DIY whole-house transceiver approach, the
>first to post/share ideas surrounding the idea of such a project, the
>first to post actual operating code, and the first to actually get a
>DIY whole-house transceiver built and working.
>
>Believe me, I really didn't rejoin this newsgroup to get into pissing
>contests (one of the main reasons I took a break), but please give
>credit where it's due.  This will be my last post on this topic.
>
>Tom