Chat & Social > The Bar - General Chat

Well know London based 4x4 Supplier rumoured to have q....

<< < (11/13) > >>

BIG-OKI:
can someone please PM me with the company name as i have no idea of who you are on about. sorry if you think i and thick.  :oops:
but if we all stick together and not use this company then the other company's will not try the same thing to others who come up with great ideas that we all use at some time in our life of 4x4's fun. :lol:  :D

Dirty Gertie:

--- Quote from: muddyweb ---
--- Quote from: "TULL" ---
If you look at any other forum where this thread was posted, it is full of messages of supoport for x-eng, etc...   but not here...  here someone will find an opportunity to have a dig at the club and the way the forum is run.
 
--- End quote ---

Sadly M-C isn't the only one; the same has happened on the LRO forum; the thread has been locked as a result of 'the few' using it as an opportunity to have a dig at the mag and forum in general. (I might add that an unpaid mod locked it, not a member of LRO staff.) thread here
--- End quote ---

thermidorthelobster:

--- Quote from: "Devon-Rover" ---mmm talk of such could lead me on to said company selling Diff guards which bear a striking resembalence to the same sold by a certian Cornish company. Who IIRC have been making then for years, and have been recognised as such for while as being very good. A few blatent copies have appeared in the last year or so.
--- End quote ---

Tricky one.  You could probably argue that there are only a certain number of ways you can make a diff guard.  I own a roof rack which is remarkably similar to another (older) type, but in my opinion it's improved and better!  I'm not condoning copying other people's ideas, but I think it's quite a complex situation when you get down to it.

SteveG:
Sorry my post brought up this old topic again :oops:

I just want to add that Neil and the other mods managed it very well in my opinion and personally I respect the fact that they give up time and money to run this forum for us, and as such I respect their guidelines for posting.

I posted the first posting naming a certain company in North London and with several expletives with '*' in the appropriate places. This post vanished but as we all know there have been a few gremlins of late and as per guidance on top of forum I posted again. This time with the expletives removed as I had clamed down a bit by then. This post was removed also, but Neil had already PM'd me and also posted to make sure I was aware.

I saw the post, PM'd back and suggested verbage that might be ok. Neil was ok with this and hence the current post.

In my view this was managed extremely well and I have no issues with the moderators or with censorship. I respect the way they want to run the site, end of story as far as I am concerned.

Long live Mud Club and I hope that the future is not orange and bright for a ceratin 4x4 parts supplier :wink:  :wink:  If anyone else still doesn't know who is being referred to have a look at some of the sig graphics with the 'No Entry' signs stamped on them or visit www.lr4x4.com for a quick peak :D

Cheers

Steve

Tyke:

--- Quote ---I'm not condoning copying other people's ideas, but I think it's quite a complex situation when you get down to it.
--- End quote ---


Thats probably the first bit of sense thats been spoken about this 'copying' issue all the way through this thread.

Designs cannot be easily protected and even when they are you would need one hell of a legal team and funds to do anything about it. Look at Dyson v Hoover . . . . it took years and a sum of money that few of us, businesses included, could ever hope to afford, to sort out the problems they had between them regarding Dysons 'Cyclonic' vacuum cleaning system and Hoovers 'similar' product. (Incidently, cyclonic systems have used in industrial dust extraction systems for many years - Dyson only 'copied' the idea).

In the world of engineering, designers are often to be found purchasing a competitors product, dissmantling it and reverse engineering a 'new' product from it. Yeah it's a questionable practice, but that's life and if there's money involved then you can be sure that someone will take advantage of what is available, that is always a driving force.

How do people think progress is made and new inovations reach the general public? . . . . . . I'll tell you . . . .  it's usually through research and development and something which I spend a lot of my working hours undertaking.

No-one has carte-blanche on the 4X4 scene and anyone with the knowledge and tools could produce the very great majority of the typical 'bolt-on' protection kits, I mean, they are not exactly rocket science are they and mostly overpriced. A sheet of plate steel, a plasma cutter and a decent welder and you are away . . . . as many DIYers already do . . . . but are they getting stick for 'copying' an existing design? . . . . no, they get a pat on the back and told that it's a nice effort or a cool bit of kit.

True 'innovation' is not very noticable in the 4x4 world as most of it has already been done before . . . . generally by the military.

The fact someone else has already done some work on a product and put it in the public domain doesn't automatically give them rights to that design and in fact, the act of putting it in the public domain automatically excludes the design from attaining any form of protection under patent law. At that point anyone is entitled to reproduce, copy, modify or do whatever they want to whatever degree they choose . . . just look at the Japanesse engining industry of couple of decades ago. Very little original design and a great deal of 'copying'.

Even existing patented designs have full technical specifications available from the patents offices for anyone to view and use for their own purposes. It may not be altogether ethically correct . . . . but niether are many other aspects of our lives and work.

Generally what is happening is called competition, and it helps to keep the prices down for all of us. If it wasn't there and designers could fully protect their products there would likely be a 'monopoly' and that is always bad as it drives product prices artificially high. It is healthy to promote competition as it makes the designers strive to produce the best product that they hope will become the market leader thus ensuring their continued success in the marketplace.

We as consumers have a choice  - we pay our money and take our pick.

If we choose the wrong one, from quality, cost, ethical or other considerations, then thats our problem.


I'm not sticking up for the bad guys - I'm just speaking as a mechanical design engineer and  trying to get things back into perspective.


What I'm saying is that we need these that copy others products in order to maintain the high standards and quality that we have now become accostomed to. It gives us a choice however 'unfair' it may be seem to be on the original designers . . . . and lets face, there are lots of companies selling very 'similar' off-road products. Truth be known, I doubt any one of them could ever honestly claim to be the originators of the designs they sell.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page