Cheap + Cheap = Experiment

[Nebadon2000]

You all did notice the 3 consecutive numbers in his user name

 

[FretRiff]

I'm glad to learn we live in amazing universe and the elitarists are wrong.

 

[agedhorse]

The race to the bottom has no winners. It’s like a rat race, even if you are the winner you are still a rat!

 

[Al Kraft]

The only issue I have with this is the DemonFX knock-off of a Darkglass product. It's a lot easier to be cheaper when you let other companies do the development of a product for you and not pay them for their effort.

As someone who works in technology development I often wonder how people can expect new products and capabilities to be developed for free. If we just reward low priced product companies who copy other people's designs, how do we expect innovators to recover their costs for the cool stuff they invent for us? How long can we exp[ect the innovators to stay in business?

 

[Nebadon2000]

As someone who works in technology development I often wonder how people can expect new products and capabilities to be developed for free. If we just reward low priced product companies who copy other people's designs, how do we expect innovators to recover their costs for the cool stuff they invent for us? How long can we exp[ect the innovators to stay in business?

Yes I wonder how the Aliens feel about us Humans reverse engineering their Tech

Seriously this has been going on since the beginning in all industries;

In Music gear you have the obvious Bass and Guitar copy's along with many electronic designs

In Home Audio and Music Gear many tried hiding their designs with goop and erasing parts numbers etc. but that made repairs difficult

Not to mention Corporate and Government espionage

 

[FretRiff]

Seriously this has been going on since the beginning in all industries

Yes, it's a little dewy-eyed to wonder in 2025 how 'innovators' can continue to exist when this has gone on for more than a century.

Some types of designs can be legally protected, others can't.

Uli Behringer rose to prominence by shamlessly going up to the legal edge (and occasionally past it) with his cheap copies and reissues.

There’s a long history of companies pushing right up to the legal line in mimicking other products without outright infringing trademarks or patents. These cases usually fall into two buckets: lookalike design with minor changes (to avoid trade dress claims) and functionally identical products using unprotected or expired designs (to avoid patent issues).

TC Electronic (now owned by Uli Behringer) has released pedals and rack units that were almost circuit-for-circuit remakes of classics with minor UI changes. The earlier mentioned Harley Benton makes instruments, amps and accessories closely modeled after products (with large legal war chests) like Gibson, Fender and Boss... and those companies have apparently decided it wasn't legally practical for them to go after Thomann. If they thought they could get even quick, temporary injunctive relief they would have tried.

Xiomi and other Chinese phone makers (not to mention Samsung) shamelessly copied Apple designs in UI and physical design for years. Apple did successfully sue Samsung over the Galaxy S, which had to be (mildly) redesigned.

It doesn't have to be electronics. Harbor Freight has styled and specced to mimic DeWalt and Milwaukee tools, Steve Madden makes near-identical Doc Marten shoes, and H&M and Zara exist as companies by turning 'innovator' designs into their own mass-market products.

How long can we exp[ect the innovators to stay in business?

Depends on the innovators, the 'innovations' in question, and the law. It's always been this way.

 

[S-Bigbottom]

Some types of designs can be legally protected, others can't.

But if the copier's are in a country that does not enforce or care about said protection laws, you can not prosecute. It means nothing.

It is said if you make something new and it becomes successful, you have about two months to get all the sales you can before the competition comes.
After that time the market will be flooded with copies and sold for cheaper.

 

[FretRiff]

if the copier's are in a country that does not enforce or care about said protection laws, you can not prosecute. It means nothing.

Infringing hardware, software and other goods can be legally enjoined from import into the US, EU, by courts in those jurisdictions, and they do not have to depend on courts in the country of manufacture to protect patents or trade dress.

A company can get legal protection wherever it has rights registered to stop sales there. Maybe not in the copier’s home country if the producing country's court is lax. But if they export you can go after importers, distributors, and retailers in countries that enforce your rights. We see this in everything from prescriptions to fake branded sneakers. Shure works with US Customs and EU border agencies to seize counterfeir microphones from Asia. In the EU Mercedes has had replica bumpers/grilles seized that use protected designs.

 

[Al Kraft]

Yes I wonder how the Aliens feel about us Humans reverse engineering their Tech

Last I heard they were fine with it, as we were not doing the most impressive job of copying their tech.

I routinely work with an IP attorney and the world of protecting everything from trademarks, to patents, to copyrights, to "secret sauce", and the rules as they relate to each and then from country to country are beyond my ability to keep straight. Hopefully the intergalactic rules are more straightforward.

 

[agedhorse]

Infringing hardware, software and other goods can be legally prohibited from import into the US, EU, by courts in those jurisdictions, and they do not have to depend on courts in the country of manufacture to protect patents or trade dress.

That’s still costly, and only addresses countries that agree with such protections.

 

[FretRiff]

That’s still costly, and only addresses countries that agree with such protections.

With physical goods like music hardware or prescription drugs, you can cut off access at the import stage. This has been the way for decades, and it doesn't mean "you can not prosecute. It means nothing" which is what I was replying to.

 

[agedhorse]

With physical goods like music hardware or prescription drugs, you can cut off access at the import stage. This has been the way for decades, and it doesn't mean "you can not prosecute. It means nothing" which is what I was replying to.

You still need legal representation and back-up docs. before CBP will act. It’s easier with counterfeit products that copy the brand name and model names.

 

[FretRiff]

Sure, but there remain protections in the countries in which companies are selling their products. For example, Klon isn't selling in China but they are claiming in US Federal court that Behringer, which idiotically used the name 'Centaur,' is engaging in trademark infringement that “blatantly infringes upon specific intellectual property owned by my company.”



There are costs to doing business with intellectual property. You understand this but many people do not, and do not even believe there are protective remedies available to companies.

 

[agedhorse]

Anytime attorneys have to get involved, it’s going to cost big money… this is the biggest lesson I learned.

 

[FretRiff]

I'm not arguing cost. I'm arguing the ability to protect trade dress, which some here claim is not possible. More, in the US trademark rights must be defended or the original owner risks losing their trademark.

 

[Nebadon2000]

It’s easier with counterfeit products that copy the brand name and model names.

I was at an Auto Parts store a few decades back and saw some car speakers named 'Pionear'

 

[Al Kraft]

Anytime attorneys have to get involved, it’s going to cost big money… this is the biggest lesson I learned.

If only we didn't get more frequent than desired refresher courses to remind us of this lesson!

 

[agedhorse]

I'm not arguing cost. I'm arguing the ability to protect trade dress, which some here claim is not possible. More, in the US trademark rights must be defended or the original owner risks losing their trademark.

I’m arguing that sometimes, the cost can become a very real ability to protect trade dress. The cheats, especially those with easy access to legal council, know this and take advantage of “rolling the dice”.

There’s a practical aspect to this as well as a theoretical aspect.

 

[FretRiff]

It cuts both ways and somehow assumes cheats have a willingness to pay lawyers to defend a dodgy yet lengthy court case in one or more countries outside their home, whose court systems may grind slowly, expensively and not in their favor. Most don't, and as I pointed out companies have a legal duty to defend their trademarks or face losing them so that can affect the roll of the dice as well.

On the other hand, there are clearly legal paths to (close to) copying that are much more amenable to cloners. Some may roll the dice and cross the line but if the situation were as dire as some here claim we'd be overrun with illegal clones with no recourse - and that's not the reality.

 

[agedhorse]

It cuts both ways and somehow assumes cheats have a willingness to pay lawyers to defend a dodgy yet lengthy court case in one or more countries outside their home, whose court systems may grind slowly, expensively and not in their favor. Most don't, and as I pointed out companies have a legal duty to defend their trademarks or face losing them so that can affect the roll of the dice as well.

On the other hand, there are clearly legal paths to (close to) copying that are much more amenable to cloners. Some may roll the dice and cross the line but if the situation were as dire as some here claim we'd be overrun with illegal clones with no recourse - and that's not the reality.

As you know, it’s mostly the big guys who have the resources to defend their IP.

As soon as the lawyers get involved, there are no real winners except for the lawyers..,