bblackwood wrote on Fri, 21 January 2011 14:05 |
Allen Corneau wrote on Fri, 21 January 2011 12:58 | What about all the Neve mic-pre clones? There's got to be hundreds of 1272/1081/1083 style mic-pre's out there, and Neve is still in business (AMS/Neve).
|
Is Neve manufacturing these mic pres? If they are, then yah, unless these other folks / manufacturers have Neve's blessing, they are stealing.
Not sure how you guys are missing the big issue here - these Sontecs and SSLs are still being made...
Do you really not see the difference?
Quote: | Would your "Davelizer" be considered a clone?
|
Considering they're not in production and the creator gave me his blessing, you could call it an approved clone. They were all custom built.
|
If I took the time to back engineer any piece of pro gear and then built it and used it in my own studio to make money I guess according to what you are saying that too would be considered theft of IP.
A long time ago Lang Electronics of New York brought out what many consider to be a very good copy of a Pultec EQ. Lang made some changes to the Pultec but it was basically a Pultec with Lang's name on it. I never heard anyone complain that Lang was stealing Pultec's IP. They both used circuits that were in the Audio Cyclopedia and before that were published in papers from WE and RCA.
CBS brought out a series of compressor/limiters that lots of radio stations and recording studios wanted to own. They were called the Volumax and the Audimax. They both had a potted in plastic black box in them that no own knew what it contained but was the heart of the unit. On the schematic it just showed a square with the traces going into and out of it. Lots of people wanted to know what was in the box. A rival company went so far as to have the plastic around the components removed by a company that specialized in de potting modules. I don't know what they did with the information but I assume they brought out a competing product.
Anything that people build can be back engineered and someone can use that knowledge to built something similar and maybe even better. (To really do a good job of back engineering takes a long time and can be costly if you have to pay for someone to do it.)
The op amps in the Sontecs are legendary for their sound. Some people might disagree but they are what make the unit sound like it sounds. So unless you use the exact Op Amps someone's home built or commercially built unit will not sound EXACTLY like a Sontec but may sound very good.
I agree that the theft of IP is something that is disagreeable at all levels and should not be allowed but today I am not sure how really enforceable it would be. Many of the circuits for equipment we all hold in high regard are freely available on the WWW and if someone wants to take that information and build a "similar' unit I think they have that right. Even if they use it in making money as long as it is their built I don't think a court would find them guilty. If they want to put the SONTEC name on it I think they may be in for a court date since it is a trademark that is recognized in the pro audio world and stands for something that is "special". Also if the sell their SONTEC labeled units they may also be in for more problems than if they simply used it in their own studio.
I am not a lawyer and I do not play one on TV so I am only stating my thoughts.
Brad - thanks for hosting this discussion in a separate discussion area.
Just a side note and please correct me if I am not stating the correct information but didn't SONTEC go out of the manufacturing business for a while and wasn't it during this time that some of the other "SONTEC" clones appeared???