How do you feel about copying premium flashlight designs?

And still. Remember who said: “I have not failed. I’ve just found 10,000 ways that won’t work.”
If you wanna pay just for the glowbulb that works, who will get the bill for the 10,000 that did not?
So Thomas Alva Edison did the wise thing, he patented his invention.
In fact he was so wise that he bought patents from other inventors, by the thousands!
He lost money on most of those patents, but struck a bonanza with a few of them.

If you’re talking about just a basic form (a specific led, built-in charging, dual switches, etc) then I don’t see a problem with that. But if you’re talking about reverse engineering proprietary parts (patented, etc) then to me that’s theft and as such I’m against it. Companies/people should be rewarded for their efforts and if not then what’s the incentive to create new and better things?

I don’t understand this question.

If you’re making a product, did you come up with the design? If you didn’t, it’s not yours and shockingly, you can’t use stuff that isn’t yours without permission.

As consumers, I guess it’s up to the individual if they want to help support thievery.

Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.
I welcome copycats.

My little sister is a prominent US Patent Attorney, so that’s my answer…

Chris

I think this is a big deal. DO NOT try to sell me something that is counterfeit.

I think there is a difference between a design “inspired by” another product and one that is “blatantly ripped off”. I have no problem with something that build on the innovation of others, but to simply steal the whole thing and just “clone” it feels wrong to me.

If there’s no patent then anyone can copy. Like someone mentioned above, Costco, Safeways, Walgreens, etc. Have tons of copycat products that shamelessly say “compare with” identical name brand products that they copy from. This saves consumers a ton of money.

Even Apple, Samsung, Huawei copy each other constantly. One company comes out with a new feature and the following year you see it on competitors’ phones. Apple comes out with the 2x zoom, Samsung copies, Apple removes earphone jack, everyone copies, Apple comes out with Live photos, everyone copies, Apple introduces Touch ID, everyone copies, Apple comes out with the notch everyone copies, Huawei comes out with the multiple camera with TOF, Samsung and Apple copies, Huawei comes out with reverse wireless charging, Samsung copies and renames it Powershare, Huawei comes out with gradient finishes, Samsung and others copy, Huawei releases night mode, Google and Samsung copies, Huawei developes ultra fast charge, Samsung and others copy, Huawei uses large batteries and have incredible battery life forces Samsung and others to follow suit, Samsung uses curved oled screens, Huawei and others copy, Samsung finds success in large screen phones, Apple eventually followed with the the Plus, Samsung comes up with idea of foldable phones, Huawei, Google, Apple copies, Huawei does it better with the much more practical outward folding MateX phone, Samsung will copy in future versions of the Galaxy Fold.

I am not a fan of knockoffs. I will not support someone or a company that makes knockoffs.

Are there even 100% knockoffs in the flashlight world? Which lights are exact copies of the original, down to the driver and firmware? I have heard on forums and videos that people do clone items, but I have never seen them personally.

After years of buying/testing electronics I have yet to see a complete carbon copy. And, if they were exact copies - how would a customer go about detecting them? (check the serial number on the OEM website?)

The wording of the OP sounds like their talking about the appearance and physical design, more specifically of small high end makers.

You’re asking how I feel about thievery? About someone not having the skill or respect to create something original, like what I offer with a sense pride and accomplishment to people that support my artistic creations? About capitalizing on my hard work and financial risk?

All I Really Need to Know I Learned in Kindergarten

I don’t have any ethical or moral obligation to buy from the first person to come up with something. If another person or company can create a product that through lower price or better features entices me to buy theirs instead, more power to them.

The payment the first person to create something gets is the chance to sell it first. If it’s easy enough for someone else to clone it and get it to market at the same time, there wasn’t much time or effort invested in the first place.

I'm all about value for money.

If that means clones or copies or fakes, so be it.

As others have said, I don’t mind an aesthetic “knockoff” as long as it doesn’t try to pass itself as the original. And in the history of flashlights, there have even been several times that the “copycat” light was better than the light it was a copy of. I welcome that. :partying_face: :+1:

Whut’s constitutes a “premium flashlight design”? They’re mostly just cylindrical tubes with one shiny end and one clicky end. Even decent lights are pretty much dime-a-dozen in the Grand Scheme Of Things.

I personally think that the US government should use the rampant, unchecked counterfeiting and exportation of counterfeit goods, and theft of American intellectual property, as a reason to put a tactical trade embargo on China and any other country that allows it until they can get their act together. The US government’s job is to protect American interests, not Chinese businesses’/government interests.

That said, I’m not talking about flashlights that are “inspired by” some type of flashlight, or which are one company’s “answer to” some other company’s flashlight. I’m talking bootlegs. If you go on ebay and search for a Spyderco pocket knife, a ton of the results will be knives that look almost exactly like the real thing….but aren’t. If you go on Amazon and search for SanDisk SD cards, a ton of the results will look just like the real thing…but aren’t. It is a deceptive business practice to take someone’s money and give them a fake imitation of what they thought they were buying, not to mention the theft of intellectual property that occurred in the production of the product.

The problem with patents is, they stop innovation.
But just copying a light is bad, please use some creativity

How is that?

Simple Wavien / RLT collars. If it weren’t for the stupid patent, we would have throwers that throw twice as much candelas. The Acebeam K75 would be a 3MCD thrower instead of 1.6MCD. The Emisar D1S would be a 600kcd thrower with the White Flat. The Jaxman Z1 would do 800kcd.

When they stifle competition, or are abused. Eg, light + filter (eg, red, ZWB2, etc.) is pretty obvious and common-sense, but some schmo has a patent on the idea (so much for “non-obvious”) and keeps you from buying a light with a preinstalled filter.

Or Apple’s “rectangle with rounded corners” design patent. Umm, doesn’t that describe most phones in existence?

A lot of patents seem to be vomited out pretty willy-nilly just to get that throughput without bothering to engage too many brain-cells, that should and would fail the common-sense test.

I’m not even going to touch on patent-trolls who just buy patents, sit on them, and sue those who might (or might not!) be “infringing”.

No pollie would even think to add a use-it-or-lose-it condition to patents, to either use them or license them out in good faith, or they expire within a much much shorter timeframe, to prevent patent-trolls from stifling innovation.

Eg, anyone who buys rights to a patent MUST put the idea into production within 1yr, or it reverts to the original owner with no repayment. So Troll, Inc. can’t just buy someone’s patent on a shiny can-opener, do nothing with it, but then sue anyone whose design comes close to said can-opener. If you buy it, you damned well better manufacture can-openers within 1yr, using the idea in the patent, or it reverts back to Joe Inventor for free.

Nah, that’d make too much sense…