<html xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=Windows-1252">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style>
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="#954F72">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal">Another example is Suit & Tie Guy or the entire Moog format ecosystem. My favorite STG module is the Post-Lawsuit filter, which specifically is a clone of the revised Arp filter after Moog sued them (back when the patents were still in
effect). </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">This is something to remember, too. All of these designs were protected under patents for a long time, which have now all expired. There is a *<b>reason</b>* things transfer into the public domain and patents aren’t considered evergreen.
</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">The same goes for prescription drugs (uh oh…another hot button item). Patents protect the initial creator for a period of time before its then OK for generics to fill the market and drive down price. This is exactly what we see happening
here. </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">At some point, every idea passes into the realm of public domain. This is how it should be.
</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Sent from <a href="https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986">
Mail</a> for Windows 10</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="border:none;padding:0in"><b>From: </b><a href="mailto:ibisum@gmail.com">Jay Vaughan</a><br>
<b>Sent: </b>Monday, January 20, 2020 4:07 AM<br>
<b>To: </b><a href="mailto:music-bar@lists.music-bar.org">Music-bar</a><br>
<b>Subject: </b>Re: Behringer System 100</p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
<br>
> On 18.01.2020, at 01:06, James Coplin <james@ticalun.net> wrote:<br>
> I think it is also fair to ask why is it OK for "boutique" manufacturers to rip off designs and make clones but not Behringer? I have a hard time taking all the gnashing of teeth seriously from people who have been doing the exact same thing for years.<br>
> <br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Very true. The Eurorack module market wouldn’t be anywhere near as gigantic as it is today if it weren’t for the rampant copying going on. Even folks have exploited this fact from both sides: look what releasing the designs for everything did for Mutable
Instruments, which are now way, way coveted in the market.<br>
<br>
j.<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
music-bar mailing list<br>
music-bar@lists.music-bar.org<br>
<a href="http://lists.music-bar.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/music-bar">http://lists.music-bar.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/music-bar</a><br>
<br>
Listen to Music-Bar Radio! <<a href="http://www.music-bar.org/radio.html">http://www.music-bar.org/radio.html</a>><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>