Yaaa, masta' Z, you should 'ave killed it while it was still small; now it's grown wings and a poisonous tail 
I cannot believe the level of the quasi-legal-speak and the overall effort gone into debating a non-issue. Worst of all is, I'm actually keeping up with posts, eisshhh...
Simply put, you can debate this till cows come home, it will have 0 effect on Mr. Lau's or Papa's business. Ultimately, it's ALWAYS back to the individual sense of moral.
I cannot believe the level of the quasi-legal-speak and the overall effort gone into debating a non-issue. Worst of all is, I'm actually keeping up with posts, eisshhh...
Simply put, you can debate this till cows come home, it will have 0 effect on Mr. Lau's or Papa's business. Ultimately, it's ALWAYS back to the individual sense of moral.
yeah
same as Papa is laughing from SR (or FH, whatever) ......
this issue is simple (for forum , at least ) , even if sorta disgusting .
who cares is PL fascia copyrighted or not ?
it's certainly worth cloning , as we can see .......
edit:
I'll pi$$ on you even if you use my non-copyrighted avatar on forum , without making penny of it
same as Papa is laughing from SR (or FH, whatever) ......
this issue is simple (for forum , at least ) , even if sorta disgusting .
who cares is PL fascia copyrighted or not ?
it's certainly worth cloning , as we can see .......
edit:
I'll pi$$ on you even if you use my non-copyrighted avatar on forum , without making penny of it
Last edited:
There are several reasons this thread is relevant:
1. NP and collaborators are not omniscient of every counterifeit/imitation on the web. This thread did start on the basis of an interesting find.
2. This forum is attended by semi professional manufacturers who may very well feel there is a legittimate market space for chassis and plates inspired by well know products. To see how and to what extent there is a reaction from the public is helpful. Not everyone can afford to have a legal firm approving every design or business idea.
3. Many forum users are very talented designers/builders. It is only fair they see and evaluate the effects of product creation and distribution when an idea either is or can be associated with a know manufacturer
4. Moral has no part in the world of business. One can debate it should but at the end of the road only the law and enforceable rights determine what can or cannot be done.
well , I strictly expressed that I'm/was talking about #4 - moral ;
rest of story is irrelevant
I'm not saying that I care for , say , Krell in tiniest amount as I care for PL , but I would stand same approach in case that Krell's fascia is in question .
OK , maybe just once , but once is enough
rest of story is irrelevant
I'm not saying that I care for , say , Krell in tiniest amount as I care for PL , but I would stand same approach in case that Krell's fascia is in question .
OK , maybe just once , but once is enough
oh boy .......... this thread is fantastic .......
tree shaker .......
No kidding! Who knew about AndrewT and his admiration for designer dresses?!
I'll pi$$ on you even if you use my non-copyrighted avatar on forum , without making penny of it
Man - after all of this I'm tempted to hire the local CNC machine guy and make up something that kinda - sorta - looks like the this case but clearly different and clearly not PL or Kre** or anyone else - just eye candy - slap something that kinda - sorta - resembles ZM's avatar for a logo and call it something like a Jacco-Manu and sell it for the bargain price of $5K.
Nah - never mind that. I'm fully retired now - so no worries there. Another opportunity missed.........
see now this is unfortunately very illustrative of the cultural divide. it really cannot be denied. do you guys have an exclusive license on such thought? no of course not, but at least in most cases the thief knows what he/she is doing is wrong and just doesnt happen to care, instead of trying to legitimise it and argue that there is nothing morally wrong in the first place.
the irony here as well is currently nowhere in the world is status, wealth and ownership worshipped so much. so much that these things and these acts exist in the first place
Last edited:
Much more like wise-*** bin!!!
I would never do anything like that to PL or Jacco or Manu!!!
Another perspective (yawn)
Hey, guys..... just some more (high-octane) fuel for the fire.
I've been playing in the automobile fabrication market for about four decades. (Yeah, I'm old.....)
A number of "kit car" manufacturers have capitalized upon (most notably) Ferrari, Porsche, and Shelby designs over those years. These kit car vendors typically would find an original Ferrari, Porsche, or Shelby and "splash" the body (take molds off it), and then sell (typically very inferior) body and sometimes chassis kits.
Ferrari, Porsche and Shelby (read, companies with well established reputations, large legal staffs, and international sales), have taken a number of kit car manufacturers TO COURT AND WON their cases for design theft. They have been successful because they provide a highly-recognizable product that is directly associated with their respective companies. In some cases, the original manufacturer has, through court action, gotten "cease and decist" court orders against the clone makers. In several cases, those possessing "unauthorized" cloned cars have had their cars seized. In many of these cases, the "kit car" manufacturer was NOT providing logos of the original, but the design was unmistakeably from the original Ferrair, Porsche or Shelby creator. A visible logo was not a prerequisite to start the legal action.
Perhaps the most impacting "counter argument" to the above precedent was in 2002, when Carrol Shelby sued Superformance for their sale of Cobra replicas. In a decision that surprised many in the industry Superformance WON the case, based on the fact that (by that time) so many companies had cloned the Cobra that Shelby could no long claim a protected design. Having said that, Superformance and Shelby apparently later reached agreement in which Superformance could claim they had a "license" with Shelby to produce their cars (and I'm assuming Shelby got a "cut" of the profits on each car Superformance then produced).
So, there is your precedence. A highly-recognizable design, an originating company with a strong international reputation, other companies splashing their design, size of the potential market base (after all, it's all about $$$$), extensive legal reviews, court cases, and ceased copycat production--or licensing if the original manufacture (Shelby, in this case) sees a cost/benefit to himself/herself.
I'd contend the driving factors are (1) the size of the potential market for the "clone" (read, profits), (2) the size of the legal staff of the originating manufacturer (read, costs), and (3) a desire on the part of the originaling manufacturer to make an issue out of this case.
Hey, guys..... just some more (high-octane) fuel for the fire.
I've been playing in the automobile fabrication market for about four decades. (Yeah, I'm old.....)
A number of "kit car" manufacturers have capitalized upon (most notably) Ferrari, Porsche, and Shelby designs over those years. These kit car vendors typically would find an original Ferrari, Porsche, or Shelby and "splash" the body (take molds off it), and then sell (typically very inferior) body and sometimes chassis kits.
Ferrari, Porsche and Shelby (read, companies with well established reputations, large legal staffs, and international sales), have taken a number of kit car manufacturers TO COURT AND WON their cases for design theft. They have been successful because they provide a highly-recognizable product that is directly associated with their respective companies. In some cases, the original manufacturer has, through court action, gotten "cease and decist" court orders against the clone makers. In several cases, those possessing "unauthorized" cloned cars have had their cars seized. In many of these cases, the "kit car" manufacturer was NOT providing logos of the original, but the design was unmistakeably from the original Ferrair, Porsche or Shelby creator. A visible logo was not a prerequisite to start the legal action.
Perhaps the most impacting "counter argument" to the above precedent was in 2002, when Carrol Shelby sued Superformance for their sale of Cobra replicas. In a decision that surprised many in the industry Superformance WON the case, based on the fact that (by that time) so many companies had cloned the Cobra that Shelby could no long claim a protected design. Having said that, Superformance and Shelby apparently later reached agreement in which Superformance could claim they had a "license" with Shelby to produce their cars (and I'm assuming Shelby got a "cut" of the profits on each car Superformance then produced).
So, there is your precedence. A highly-recognizable design, an originating company with a strong international reputation, other companies splashing their design, size of the potential market base (after all, it's all about $$$$), extensive legal reviews, court cases, and ceased copycat production--or licensing if the original manufacture (Shelby, in this case) sees a cost/benefit to himself/herself.
I'd contend the driving factors are (1) the size of the potential market for the "clone" (read, profits), (2) the size of the legal staff of the originating manufacturer (read, costs), and (3) a desire on the part of the originaling manufacturer to make an issue out of this case.
Last edited:
Jeff Rowland's plant is here, in Colorado Springs--close to two of the auto machine shops I use. I've had the urge to do some "dumpster diving" at the Rowland facility, to see if they have any "sub-par" cases (or PCBs, or semis, or torroids, etc) they might have scrapped......!
Those parts could come in handy for building a JR "clone"...
who ever would want to do that ?
Attachments
who ever would want to do that ?
To show you how big a Dummy I am - until a couple of days ago when it was mentioned here I had never heard about this guy. Then a little web surfing showed up where he was building clones for Pass stuff in the past. The website for Jeff Rowland Products seems to skip over that part of his history but it is rather enlightening about what a true innovator in the area of audio that he is. Or so he says...............
Take a look at #3
Attachments
- Status
- Not open for further replies.