Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 20th Aug 2012 22:14 UTC
Legal "The web has been alight these past few weeks with the details of the Apple v. Samsung lawsuit. It's been a unique opportunity to peer behind the curtain of how these two companies operate, as the trial seeks to answer the question: did Samsung copy Apple? But there's actually another question that I think is much more interesting to the future of innovation in the technology industry: regardless of whether the courts say that Samsung copied Apple or not, would we all be better off if we allowed - even encouraged - companies to copy one another?" This is very relevant.
Thread beginning with comment 531619
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
unclefester
Member since:
2007-01-13

In both examples the copies were better in a number of ways than the originals. The Nissan engines were much cheaper to build and lighter than the originals without sacrificing perfomance or reliability. The MX-5 was far better built and far more reliable than the Lotus

Reply Parent Score: 3

Chrispynutt Member since:
2012-03-14

That's the thing missing from this debate. That the very act of redoing or copying (if you must use the term) can lead to innovation.

Just the act of redoing someone elses work allows you to understand their thinking and allows you to introduce your own.

Far to many people believe in the singular designer or creative talent that works in isolation and plucks amazing ideas out of thin air.

We all build on each others work. Sometimes those building on others aren't of the same skill, but we still allow it all the same.

Ive's designs are clearly built on the work of Dieter Rams, only an idiot would argue otherwise. However Ive's added his own thinking and I utterly defend his right to do so.

Apple is a trendsetter, we accept trends and artistic movements with ease in other fields why is it so hard to accept in the tech industry?

Reply Parent Score: 5

unclefester Member since:
2007-01-13


Ive's designs are clearly built on the work of Dieter Rams, only an idiot would argue otherwise. However Ive's added his own thinking and I utterly defend his right to do so.


Dieter Rams works were also highly derivative and not particularly unoriginal. His ideas can be readily traced back to the minimalist designs of the early 20th century. These in turn were derived from ancient Japanese design principles.

Reply Parent Score: 2