E1.20 RDM (Remote Device Management) Protocol Forums

E1.20 RDM (Remote Device Management) Protocol Forums (http://www.rdmprotocol.org/forums/index.php)
-   RDM General Implementation Discussion (http://www.rdmprotocol.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=4)
-   -   Partial RDM implementation? (http://www.rdmprotocol.org/forums/showthread.php?t=875)

svanciel November 3rd, 2008 09:52 PM

Partial RDM implementation?
 
After speaking to many manufacturers at LDI about a desire to have RDM available in their products, I heard an interesting comment to the effect that various sets of the IP addresses required to implement RDM were "owned" by different parties and some did not chose to pay to use the "rights" that others had tied up. Without going into the nitty-gritty of business decisions, I am wondering if it is possible to have a partial implementation of an RDM talkback scheme. For example, in my current situation, remote addressing is not an issue but getting lamp hours and error messages is highly desirable. Is this feasible within the current RDM protocol?

sblair November 3rd, 2008 11:19 PM

Steve,

I'm not aware of any IP (patents) that are at issue. I have not heard of any discussion or potential issues of IP that are blocking RDM implementation for a number of years now. The majority of the IP was held by HES, but it was openly put on the table for use in ESTA developing RDM. I'm not aware of any IP licensing requirements by anyone.

Any manufacturer can implement as many or as few messages in RDM as they choose, so yes it is possible to have an implementation that only supports something like Getting/Setting DMX Address.

ericthegeek November 4th, 2008 09:10 AM

The E1.20 standard is an ANSI standard that is open to anyone who wishes to implement it. The document itself it available to anyone for $40.00.

There aren't really any "IP addresses" is RDM. Each vendor needs a Manufacturer ID which is managed by ESTA.

It's a common practice in some industries for a company to try to claim they have a patent that covers part of an industry standard after that standard has been approved. I am not aware of anyone making such a claim that would cover RDM. Of course, someone could make such a claim at any time, but given the number of people who have already done some form of talkback, it would be hard to overcome the prior-art argument.

I'm curious who told you that RDM was covered by patents? If you have a way to contact them, please ask them to post here and explain why they believe this to be the case. It helps everyone if we can clear up the confusion.

svanciel November 4th, 2008 09:45 PM

Thank you for the added insights. I am waiting to hear from the manufacturer of a luminaire we'd like to buy if they can turn-on at least some of the RDM messages for us. I have not gotten into all of the inner workings of RDM so I was curious about the IP comment and the issue of "someone in NY" holding up progress. I'm really just a user who would like to get a job done without being too concerned about all of the nut-n-bolts (or is that bits-n-bytes) that are under the hood. Seems to me like RDM has the potential to help us get our work done more efficiently and effectively so I'll keep bugging people to get on the bus.:)

svanciel November 4th, 2008 10:03 PM

In no particular order, some of the people I spoke with at LDI were from Highend Systems, Vari*Lite, GrandMA, ETC, Wybron, Martin, Birket... some seem tentative about RDM, others seem to be out in front. Sure hope it does not take too long to gain wider acceptance.

SV

sblair November 5th, 2008 02:24 PM

Steve,

Thanks again for being out there in front pushing for adoption by everyone.

No one is going to want to discuss patent concerns in a public forum. Please pass my contact information on to the company in question and I'd be happy to help address their concerns and point them to the right resources for evaluating any IP concerns they have.

svanciel November 5th, 2008 09:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sblair
Please pass my contact information on to the company in question and I'd be happy to help address their concerns and point them to the right resources for evaluating any IP concerns they have.

Scott,

I will do this tomorrow. Thanks.

Steve

prwatE120 November 7th, 2008 07:19 AM

As co-ordinator of the ESTA ACN/RDM Connectivity Pavillion at the most recent LDI (and also last year at LDI in Orlando), I too am interested in this apparent "mis-information" about RDM. Could you kindly include me in the loop (off list) on further discussions, so it can be properly resolved.

I also put together a similar RDM promotion at PLASA this year, and no-one has approached me with these same concerns.

At LDI we had some 15 different manuafacturers represented showing compatible RDM product, and the list is growing ...

regards
Peter Willis


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:18 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.