what's a "clone"?

[slaveern]

I'm an amateur and I don't know the history of the pre/mic designs, patents, electronics...etc. So please excuse my ignorance. I don't mean to start a flaming thread but these are genuine questions that I have. Let me take 1073 (don't kill me for that lol) as an example:

- What is a 1073 clone? Exact copy of the original 1073 design but using newer components? A slightly modified design to by-pass "copyright" issues? Vendor paying royalties to allow them to produce clones? Patent expired? As long as it doesn't have Neve's aura around it??

- What about clone vendors claim "authentic reproduction of a Neve™* 1073 module" or "Based on the NEVE 1073 channel strip"...etc.? It's legal and all that?

slaveern...

[travisbrown]

A replica (or an attempt at replication) of an extant model by another manufacturer. May be licensed, or an infringement on design, or in public domain. Sometimes the intent is just to make a cheaper version, sometimes it's intended to pass off as an original, sometimes it's done in homage to a classic original.

There's no strict definition in this case other than "close copy"

[dannygold]

"begun, the clone wars have"

-yoda

[slaveern]

Originally Posted by travisbrown

A replica (or an attempt at replication) of an extant model by another manufacturer. May be licensed, or an infringement on design, or in public domain. Sometimes the intent is just to make a cheaper version, sometimes it's intended to pass off as an original, sometimes it's done in homage to a classic original.

There's no strict definition in this case other than "close copy"

Thanks for your insight, but this still doesn't quite answer my question because quite a handful of 'named' manufacturer produces and directly/indirectly claims that it is similar/like/based-on/clone of the original. I believe these companies must have good basis for their business (infringement is not very likely). E.g. Vintech, Chandler, Brent Averill, Chameleon Labs with all their 1073.

Even if it is a 'cheaper version', wouldn't the design be almost identical that it infringes the patent? Basically what's the difference between these preamp 'clone' and selling replica rolex online?

[Rick Sutton]

Originally Posted by slaveern

Even if it is a 'cheaper version', wouldn't the design be almost identical that it infringes the patent?

You seem to be looking for a simple answer for a complex situation.
The answer varies according to each "clones" approach.

[slaveern]

Originally Posted by Rick Sutton

You seem to be looking for a simple answer for a complex situation.
The answer varies according to each "clones" approach.

I see. I'm just curious why I've never seen any sort of court actions related to the N word mentioned everywhere.

[CoteRotie]

Originally Posted by slaveern

I see. I'm just curious why I've never seen any sort of court actions related to the N word mentioned everywhere.

You're assuming that there's a patent covering these designs. Patents give the asignee rights for a limited period of time depending on the type of patent and the country in which it's issued. Many early audio patents are expired.

Also, not every circuit is patentable. It may be a great audio circuit because of component selection, but that doesn't mean a patent exists. Other circuits may be in the public domain because they were never patented.

Thirdly, patent litigation is extremely expensive. Attorneys generally won't take it on contingency unless the patent is tested in court already and there's someone with big pockets to sue. A small patent holder suing a small infringer usually winds up nowhere.

Regards,

John

[duckoff]

I'm just curious why I've never seen any sort of court actions related to the N word mentioned everywhere.

Actually there was talk of it recently - Neve were getting pissed off with it all - can't remember the outcome, but I think they basically told everyone to stop ripping them off.

[John Willett]

Originally Posted by slaveern

what's a "clone"?

A clone is an identical copy of the original in all respects so that it is absolutely impossible to tell the two apart.

A digital copy of a recording would be a clone as it is identical in every respect.


You cannot clone a microphone or similar equipment. Although I have seen the word clone referred to in these forums it is totally misleading and the word should not be used in this respect - it's misrepresentation.

There are various attempts to copy and reproduce classic microphones etc., but these are in no way clones - they are copies - good or otherwise.

[Geoff_T]

Originally Posted by duckoff

Actually there was talk of it recently - Neve were getting pissed off with it all - can't remember the outcome, but I think they basically told everyone to stop ripping them off.

Hi

That was when Tom Misner got involved and threatened to sue all the cloners... I don't believe anything came of it. Now it's a general free-for-all with cloners building knock-offs of current AMS-Neve products and other manufacturers bragging how their next product will contain knock-off Neve circuitry.

Seems that all's fair in love and war and Neve cloning!

[HiString]

That was when Tom Misner got involved and threatened to sue all the cloners

That sounds par for the course where TM is concerned.

[travisbrown]

Originally Posted by John Willett

A clone is an identical copy of the original in all respects so that it is absolutely impossible to tell the two apart.

Technically true, but outside genetics and Star Trek's Replicators, it's definition and use is much looser. "Clone" in the gear world means, "we tried to copy that, more or less."

Probably stems from the birth of the PC, when everything not IBM was an IBM clone. My first computer, and Apple IIc, was an Apple "clone"

[slaveern]

Originally Posted by CoteRotie

Also, not every circuit is patentable. It may be a great audio circuit because of component selection, but that doesn't mean a patent exists. Other circuits may be in the public domain because they were never patented.

Hmm. I tends to think that way too. But that led me to recall the "B" and the "M" brand saga where, still as of today, everybody's pointing the finger at the "B" brand yell and holla about how they blatantly copying other people's stuff, and sell it at fraction, amid using much cheaper components. Put aside the fact that the "B" brand stuff are crap, what's the real fuss about it, really, if the same people are ok with the existence of these N clones?

OTOH, does anybody know the very specific of the 1073 circuit and its history of the design? It's because it's so ubiquitously used and so many of 1073-like/clone/design boxes are out there and all are praised in the highest mountain. I can't find it in USPTO database. Yet I found some patents laughable, like:

6,839,441 Sound mixing console with master control section (Jan 2005)

I'm sure you having seen something as novel as this before, check the abstract:

A sound mixing control console used in live concert performances, etc., includes a master control section having motorized knobs for controlling variable parameters such as input gain, pan, frequency equalization and the like of individual input channels. Each of plural input channels includes a dedicated fader for controlling output level and a selector switch for applying the master control section to that channel for controlling other variable parameters besides output level. A memory subsystem stores and recalls the positions of the motorized knobs. When an input channel is selected, the knobs of the master control section assume positions corresponding to the current values of the variable parameters, which may then be adjusted manually and stored. Signal processing is carried out by digitally-controlled circuitry.

LOL!

Thirdly, patent litigation is extremely expensive. Attorneys generally won't take it on contingency unless the patent is tested in court already and there's someone with big pockets to sue. A small patent holder suing a small infringer usually winds up nowhere.

BTW I found this:
http://www.gearslutz.com/board/new-p...l-chapter.html

[Geoff_T]

Originally Posted by slaveern

OTOH, does anybody know the very specific of the 1073 circuit and its history of the design?

Hi

It's just before my time at Neve (1970 to my 1971) but the very important point to remember with Neve products is that NOTHING is designed by an individual... the products are designed by a team of designers... even in 1970.

One day I'll write a book on the subject naming all the great guys from back when... mostly unsong heroes!

[slaveern]

Originally Posted by Geoff_T

Hi

It's just before my time at Neve (1970 to my 1971) but the very important point to remember with Neve products is that NOTHING is designed by an individual... the products are designed by a team of designers... even in 1970.

One day I'll write a book on the subject naming all the great guys from back when... mostly unsong heroes!

I'd love to read about it!!