Is anyone familiar with the history of Apple and Windows. It was a direct ripoff of the IBM windows system. So are we going to throw away our computers.
The Japanese have been backwards engineering products for years and American companies do it to, it is called industrial espionge.
Mike
Mike: "Is anyone familiar with the history of Apple and Windows. It was a direct ripoff of the IBM windows system. So are we going to throw away our computers. "
Yes, I am familiar with it and you are clearly not! Apple's Macintosh was, of course, the first commercial system with true windowing, and Apple got it from a Xerox PARC and paid Xerox for it. The mouse was an invention made ten or fifteen years earlier at Stanford. Apple also commissioned Sony to invent the small 'floppy' disc.
I'd say if you can't get your history straight, maybe you should return to the command-line.
oops - Apple had the Lisa before the Mac. Same difference, but more reasonably priced.The current Macintosh is Jobs' reworked 1985 NeXt interface over BSD Unix. No relation to either Apple or IBM.
Finally, who do you think own the IBM PC now? China!
Just to stay really off topic, the Xerox Star was the first, running Smalltalk, which both Microsoft and Apple used for their windows systems. The original mouse had 3 buttons.
Back on topic - how long has the Toho been out? The big difference between patent and copywrite is that patent is intended to be a limited protection. While it has been extended a lot over the years, it was only intended to give an edge to a new design.
Ed Richards
http://www.epr-art.com
An obvious, and probably idiotic, question:
If you're going to make a copy/knock-off of a camera, why not copy Burke & James (or Deardorff) in LF-wood, or Graflex SuperGraphics, in metal/technical cameras? They sell well on the used market, are instantly identifiable, and there is no parent company to go yelling to their local version of The Feds about being copied. I have a hard time believing (though I'm undoubtedly wrong) that Toho has such a large and loyal following, that it's worth copying a design from a live, lawer-equipped, company, as opposed to a classic with identical functionality but no political heft.
On the other hand, I don't make my living building cameras, so maybe nobody would buy a brand-new B&J at Shen-Hao prices.
Another data point. I emailed Robert White about this, and got an email reply from Mark Sampson, a Robert White employee I presume.
He says that this is definitely a Shen Hao, and that the Shen Hao copy is not made under license. There is no doubt that this is an illegal copy. And that Robert White knows this and apparently doesn't care.
Shame on Robert White. This is not the behavior I need from them if they want to do business with me. Because if they are perfectly willing to screw Toho, what will they do to their customers?
Bruce Watson
It is not that sure that buying from the copycat would in the long run stifle innovation. One could argue that if the innovator do not have the means to compete on price with the copycats, its only way to fight back would be to keep innovating so as to present a "moving target".
QT, I beg to differ. It is, in fact, well documented that design theft does stifle innovation. This is the foundation upon which the patent system was built. The purpose of a patent is to give the innovator an opportunity to make enough money to payoff their R&D and to make some profit on top of that -- to incent innovation.
It's easy to make a low cost copy of someone else's design. If you didn't expend any R&D, then you don't have to pay off any R&D, therefore your expenses are lower. You can see that how unfair that is, can you not? And this is the unfairness that patent system was designed to correct.
Bruce Watson
It is not that sure that buying from the copycat would in the long run stiffle innovation. One could argue that if the innovator do not have the means to compete on price with the copycats, its only way to fight back would be to keep innovating so as to present a "moving target".
And what will the original innovator use for capital to fund this ongoing innovation if not the proceeds of past innovations?
Or, to put it rather bluntly, I hope you won't mind if I take your entire library of wonderful images and start marketing them at a very low price and keeping the proceeds, Tuan. Look at the bright side - the fact that you're not making any money from them any more just means that you'll have to keep innovating so as to present a moving target.
With all respect, Tuan, I think you haven't really thought this through. Intellectual property rights exist in our society not because they benefit the individual (although they do) but because, on the whole, they stimulate innovation and our entire society benefits.
RE: The question which asks why not copy an expired patent wood camera, or metal field camera, rather than a current camera -- the design of many things is somewhat directed by the tools and material of the time that are most economical. The Toho design reflects such an influence; it uses common, conventional machinery, nothing special, so the recent knock-off by Shen Hao fits off-the-shelf machines so well it's a no-brainer to just copy. OTOH, setting up to make a Linhof Super Technika would be a challenge, and spendy as heck.
Wood cameras - well, we already see how Shen Hao chooses and makes wood parts - not very well at all, IMHO. No disrespect to those who find them pretty, and of course being pretty is not even neccessary to function, but it's very clear why the Shen Hao is a cheap camera - it cannot compete with better craftsmanship.
But maybe that's part of the problem? Toho appear to be a "quiet" company. They are not "seen" or advertised in many places - maybe this elusiveness gives the impression that they are NOT an active/innovative company - otherwise wouldn't they have a "range" of cameras that most photographers were familiar with?
Paul,
Toho makes two 4x5 models, a 5x7 and an 8x10, along with several accessories. No, they don't advertize in any photo magazines that I know of, but then neither does Shen Hao. They do have a web site that describes their products and they publish printed brochures. How much or little a company spends on advertising and marketing should have no bearing on whether or not it is legal and ethical to rip-off their designs.
Despite the fact that I personally dislike Shen Hao (for quality reasons) I must admit a little admiration for the fact that they are "doing the business" so-to-speak!
Ironically, Shen Hao's advertising and marketing strategy is also a near copy of Toho's. They don't advertise in any photo magazines, but instead depend on a few dealers and end users to spread the work about their products. In fact, they have relied on the exact same dealers Toho used to intruduce their products in the US (Badger Graphic) and Europe (Robert White). An interesting parallel, but it still doesn't change the fact that stealing a competitor's design and selling lower priced knock-offs is unethical, potentially illegal and harmful to the companies that actually spend time and money on R&D to bring better products to market.
Kerry
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks