Frogfish
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
DavidBM wrote:
Yes I had heard that; but my guess (which could be mistaken) is that it isn't strictly cloned. R&D is not free even for a clone: you have to source the aspeherics, the ED elements etc. I don't believe you can do that for this price, even with no design costs. And also, why would you clone a both complicated and niche lens like an ultra wide macro? I think either the factory that makes them has made extra and sold them on (in which case they deserve a serious kick in the a**) or else Laowa sold off excess optical units themselves, not expecting them to end up being sold cheap on the international market (which may or may not be allowed under the terms of such sales).
IN any case I hope Laowa gets legal satisfaction if any of the scenarios where either the factory breached their contractual obligations, or the purchasers sold on where they weren't supposed to, or if indeed it does turn out to be copied.
But without knowing exactly what happened, I reckon anyone who wants to buy one of these can do so with an easy conscience.
...Show more →
Having lived in China I can give you other options knowing how the following situations often occur. In al cases Designer outsources to Factories A, B and C with copyright restrictions in place.
Situation A.
Manufacturing goes ahead but without complete control of the factory and production process by the designer (see : Apple for how this is done, even then it's not 100% successful) some of the production can easily be diverted (e.g. maybe they are supposed to run two shifts before changing moulds, but run a third with the products diverted, or maybe they are supposed to use moulds for 2 weeks before replacing and destroying, however the moulds are instead sold not destroyed.
Situation B
Designer breaks contract with Factory B who then goes on to produce a 'new line', renamed and sold as a competing product.
Situation C
Factory C copies designs and formula and sells to a competitor of the designer.
In all cases cosmetic changes are made before the new competing product is launched and in China proving copyright trespass is very difficult (though they've greatly improved in this regard, especially with disputes between two domestic companies).
And so on. There are so many factories, and often a lack of supervision and control, in China that any of the above scenarios (and many more I'm sure you can now envisage) is feasible. Opteka make some fine products that are far more reasonably priced than the 'originals', they are usually careful to copy products that are difficult to prove copyright to, although this one may see them pay a heavy price if transgression is proven.
True Story (from a lecture I attended in Shanghai on Copyright Transgression).
Unilever had some lorries (trucks), direct from their factories and in collusion with the drivers, diverted to a factory (less than 20kms from Unilever's) making copy Unilever products, where the originals were unloaded and sold off separately whilst the copies they made were loaded up on Unilever's own lorries and then delivered to major supermarkets 'direct from the factory' ! They were caught when Unilever hired a Western industrial detective to investigate how the fakes were being delivered to the stores..
|
