Dicky Mint
Senior Member
Hi I was wondering what the situation was concerning the commercial use of PICAXE? Is it necessary to obtain a licence or is it a complete no go area?
Commercial use of PICAXE
- Thread starter Dicky Mint
- Start date
As far as I know you can use a PICAXE for commercial use - I think the only time you need a licence is when you are distributing the PICAXE compilers (software that downloads the program to the PICAXE), even then you can just direct people to the download page without requiring a licence.
Jamster
Jamster
Dicky Mint
Senior Member
Wow that's great! I don't 'spose I'll be looking at thousands of PICAXEs but I think they are very amenable to commercial products. I'm trying to keep my future opportunities open. PICAXE has gone from completely unknown to me to the best thing since sliced bread in a couple of weeks and I'm certain I've much, much more to learn and enjoy!
You have the right to use the code (firmware) under the conditions under which it was sold to you, you dont own the code as such.
As far as I know REV Ed do allow the resale of PICAXEs, but I would not assume that is a general right for such products.
I meant your own code not the "Firmware" as it would not be a picaxe without the firmware.
I also doubt Rev-ed could do a darn thing about a product sold with a picaxe in it, you own the chip and can do as you see fit.
If the chips were supplied as free samples then that is a different matter.
The simple fact as Martin pointed out that Rev-ed will pre-program chips in large quanitys would imply resale of product use is allowed.
I also doubt Rev-ed could do a darn thing about a product sold with a picaxe in it, you own the chip and can do as you see fit.
If the chips were supplied as free samples then that is a different matter.
The simple fact as Martin pointed out that Rev-ed will pre-program chips in large quanitys would imply resale of product use is allowed.
Dicky Mint
Senior Member
That's very interesting. PICAXE could turn out to be valuable in terms of business as well as the value of learning!
I started work on some software to download a program from a specified internet address to a PICAXE without the user seeing the code, the intention was to update the PICAXE code on circuits sold by buissneses without the need for the user to send the product back or to have to download the PE if they wanted to update. Unfortunatly I got distracted and it never worked 'properly' (ie: would download the file to the computer temporarily but wouldn't download it to the PICAXE using the Rev Ed Compilers). I started it after someone asked if it was possible a while back but I never finished it.
May take it up again if I get a spare moment this halfterm.
Jamster
May take it up again if I get a spare moment this halfterm.
Jamster
I'd love to see the set up that you use to load the firmware/additional code onto the PIC chips. Any chance of some pictures?
Take Care
Dave
Imagine a number of these in a line! Each machine can do about 3000-5000 chips per day (depending on program cycle time).
http://mc-systemsinc.com/handler/8780.pdf
Last edited:
mrburnette
Senior Member
Before venturing too far out into commercial space with the PICAXE, remember that when you build a product for sale from parts that you generally do NOT receive the right to transfer any specific warranty or fitness-of-purpose to the end-user. In other words, you incur a liability that is likely not the responsibility of the chip/firmware manufacturer. So, as an example, if you were to use a PICAXE in a commercial product and you were later sued by the end-user for a failure of said product and a post-mortem of the failure indicated that the fault was with the PICAXE firmware, extending liability beyond yourself/your company is nearly impossible. I have not read the Rev Ed reuse guidelines, but I suspect that the use of terms such as "educational" would qualify their target market and use outside that area, while not illegal, is not recommended.
- Ray
"Revolution Education Ltd specialise in developing microcontroller development systems for teaching of electronics within the education sector. Our software and hardware is used throughout the world and our software has been translated into a dozen different languages. Many of our products such as the PICAXE microcontroller range are also extensively used by hobbyists for electronic projects and robots."
Last edited:
hippy
Ex-Staff (retired)
That's usually true of any commercial product, PICAXE or other. The first line of defence for most commercial manufacturers is to not guarantee any particular fitness of purpose to their end-user, and if a claim doesn't fail at that stage it's then a long chain of people blaming someone else and usually for a court to resolve.
As a commercial venture it's always best to seek legal advice on product liability and related legislation but using a PICAXE in a commercial product should be no different to using any other sub-assembly in a product.
mrburnette
Senior Member
Agreed on the legal advice and agreed with limitations on the sub-assembly statement. Ethics and good engineering would still prevent me from using a PICAXE in a pacemaker, a breaking system for an automobile, and other critical systems... even a traffic light is not a use I would scope for a PICAXE. For stage lightning, school projects, proof-of-concepts, home control (except fire/emergency/safety), and nearly unlimited personal-projects use, I think the PICAXE programmed uC is a good choice.
For all the aspiring coders and engineers out there... think about implications and do due diligence in selecting components for products that have a critical operating environment. Critical thinking up-front eliminates 80% of down-the-line failures (80/20 rule.)
- Ray
Note how on many IC datasheets all the big semiconductor houses tend to state that the components are not warranted/certified for use in safety critical systems.
The difference is probably the size of the price tag to cover any unforseen eventualities that may arise. Similar to devices for use in aviation, astronautics or environments where radiation hardened devices are recommended/required.
It's not always exclusively to do with the cost of the processing sand, IP and a small element of profit.
= = =
So not for use in cruise missile guidance for example. Given the number of large US bombs that failed to explode on impact in Vietnam - has anyone got any %age figures? Then I don't suppose the odd cruise missile going AWOL would make a lot of difference. They never seem to come back for diagnostic checks and errors are usually put down to other vagaries.
How many stories over the years about torpedo fuses failing to work correctly - back in the dim dark past of course. We haven't heard about the next crop yet, doubtless covered by 30 year rules etc.
The difference is probably the size of the price tag to cover any unforseen eventualities that may arise. Similar to devices for use in aviation, astronautics or environments where radiation hardened devices are recommended/required.
It's not always exclusively to do with the cost of the processing sand, IP and a small element of profit.
= = =
So not for use in cruise missile guidance for example. Given the number of large US bombs that failed to explode on impact in Vietnam - has anyone got any %age figures? Then I don't suppose the odd cruise missile going AWOL would make a lot of difference. They never seem to come back for diagnostic checks and errors are usually put down to other vagaries.
How many stories over the years about torpedo fuses failing to work correctly - back in the dim dark past of course. We haven't heard about the next crop yet, doubtless covered by 30 year rules etc.
Last edited:
Dicky Mint
Senior Member
Thanks for all the advice and information. I think I'm looking at non-critical systems for any commercial spin-offs.