Bought my first clone.... Why do I feel so guilty!?

[Rossum]

Problem is that if the origional designer doesn't bother to copyright their graphics ........... they don't own them.

You misunderstand copyright. Copyright is inherent the moment you create an original work and fix it in some from. You can get additional protection by registering your copyright, but it legally exists even if you never do so.

 

[tj99959]

You misunderstand copyright. Copyright is inherent the moment you create an original work and fix it in some from. You can get additional protection by registering your copyright, but it legally exists even if you never do so.

You have no proof of ownership without registration.

 

[bluecat]

I understand the OP point of view and share it. In this case the original is not obtainable, and that does make quite a bit of difference. If it were a choice due to economics, that would make a difference. It is the cloning itself that I have an issue with...
If someone tried to pull that in the USA and the product was made here, they would be sued and criminal investigations. Why?? Because that is crap. Because they are in another country, doesn't make it a less crappy thing to do. If they had a twist of originality, if they were trying to make a better mouse trap by adding something, fine... This is straight up stealing down to the markings and logos. While I don't harass people for having clones, I do not purchase them for this reason.

Which bring up the point of why only one device I know of that is made in the USA is the Provari. Why hasn't anyone cloned that one yet? The rest of the mods that are cloned are made outside the US or at least the ones that come to my mind and I will happily concede the point to someone that can point out the slew of devices made in the USA.

If one does not legally have a patent/trademark or whatever, then it is fair game. I wonder how the different tire manufacturers get away with it. They all look the same. What I have noticed lately in the clone market is many are advertising them as XXXX style mod. One also has to realize that other countries don't play by our rules. Good thing bad thing? That would be up to debate. It takes me back 30 some years and sitting in my focus groups in college debate globalization. We didn't solve it then either.

 

[Silent Solution]

I take the clones out with me as beaters, and the originals stay in the house.

This. At first I was a little scared of buying a clone, because I thought it would just be shoddy machining and be a piece of crap. I bought an Astro clone (I own the real one) and this thing is exactly alike. The only way you can tell the difference is the engraving on the logo. It is more embossed on the original. Now I have bought a Nemesis clone, Trident clone, Helios clone, Nimbus clone, etc.. you get the idea. I have not had any problems with any of my clones. Sit back, relax, and vape that baby boy, or if you feel guilty you can send my way.

 

[Dac311]

Problem is that if the origional designer doesn't bother to copyright their graphics ........... they don't own them.

Untrue. Copyrights exists without registration.

 

[Dac311]

You have no proof of ownership without registration.

There are forms of proof, it's just much more difficult to prove without registration.

 

[bluecat]

There are forms of proof, it's just much more difficult to prove without registration.

Semantics, really.

Do I have to register with your office to be protected?
No. In general, registration is voluntary. Copyright exists from the moment the work is created. You will have to register, however, if you wish to bring a lawsuit for infringement of a U.S. work. See Circular 1, Copyright Basics, section “Copyright Registration.”



U.S. Copyright Office - Copyright in General (FAQ)

 

[indoorsindica]

Your argument only holds water as the Law specifically states any attempt to reproduce US Currency is a Felony. This is a Specific not a broad reaching law and only covers Federally regulated currency.
Sorry, but 3D printer manufacturing would have already been banned if everything was inclusive.

I'll do you one better, then. Lets say you take an item that is patented (keeping in mind I realize that most PV products are not) and make a 95-100% copy of it. You have not broke the law. On the other hand, the second you attempt to sell it, you are profiting on someone else's intellectual property, and they are owed money. Doesn't matter if you call it a clone or not, the law makes the determination based on % of similarity to the original product as described in the patent / TM, etc. If this were not the case, then we would have cloning of everything in the US. You are fully within your legal rights to make a 100% copy of a patented item, provided it is for your personal use. So you could 3D print a replacement part for your laser printer and use it and be within the law. You cannot, however, make a 100% copy out of 3D printed parts and electronics of a laser printer and sell it.

This is all a moot point, since all of about 10 products are probably patented in our arena. If they were, then the clones that are 95+% would be declared counterfeits (assuming the OEM filed suit) and not allowed past customs in most cases. They would certainly not be allowed to be sold by US retailers. I'll admit to a non-applicable example earlier, but this is a bit more on point (and just as pointless). A copy is still a counterfeit if it is identical or nearly so, according to intellectual property law.

I will not debate this further publically in an effort to not further hijack what is a good thread. PM is a thing.

Dude the horse died 3 pages ago...