Behringer System 100

[Niall Munnelly]

Sure, but you know what I mean!

Sent from a mobile device. Typos and probably bad ideas.

> On Jan 21, 2020, at 12:57 AM, Ibi Sum <ibisum at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Oh god please, no more Axel Hartmann designed synths!
> 
> ;
> --
> seclorum 
> 
>>> On 20.01.2020, at 23:55, Niall Munnelly <niall.munnelly at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>> Electronics patents have pretty firm expectations, but trade-dress falls under copyright and I think those are the violations most people - end users and the original manufacturers, at least - find objectionable. I daresay Behringer, et al would generate less controversy if they hired Axel Hartmann or someone along those lines to handle the mechanical design and aesthetics. A minimoog with a red faceplate and encoders is just another three-osc synth, but a Behringer Model-D is a bridge too far.
>> 
>> Sent from a mobile device. Typos and probably bad ideas.
>> 
>>>> On Jan 20, 2020, at 4:55 PM, Tony Scharf <tony.scharf at outlook.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 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).  
>>>  
>>> 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 *reason* things transfer into the public domain and patents aren’t considered evergreen. 
>>>  
>>> 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.
>>>  
>>> At some point, every idea passes into the realm of public domain.   This is how it should be. 
>>>  
>>> Sent from Mail for Windows 10
>>>  
>>> From: Jay Vaughan
>>> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2020 4:07 AM
>>> To: Music-bar
>>> Subject: Re: Behringer System 100
>>>  
>>> 
>>> 
>>> > On 18.01.2020, at 01:06, James Coplin <james at ticalun.net> wrote:
>>> > 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.
>>> > 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 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.
>>> 
>>> j.
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> music-bar mailing list
>>> music-bar at lists.music-bar.org
>>> http://lists.music-bar.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/music-bar
>>> 
>>> Listen to Music-Bar Radio! <http://www.music-bar.org/radio.html>
>>>  
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> music-bar mailing list
>>> music-bar at lists.music-bar.org
>>> http://lists.music-bar.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/music-bar
>>> 
>>> Listen to Music-Bar Radio! <http://www.music-bar.org/radio.html>
>> _______________________________________________
>> music-bar mailing list
>> music-bar at lists.music-bar.org
>> http://lists.music-bar.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/music-bar
>> 
>> Listen to Music-Bar Radio! <http://www.music-bar.org/radio.html>
> _______________________________________________
> music-bar mailing list
> music-bar at lists.music-bar.org
> http://lists.music-bar.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/music-bar
> 
> Listen to Music-Bar Radio! <http://www.music-bar.org/radio.html>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.music-bar.org/pipermail/music-bar/attachments/20200121/b137ac5f/attachment.html>