I did some research on the Mackie/Behringer lawsuit

  • Thread starter Thread starter Chris Tondreau
  • Start date Start date
WTF?? Why am I getting flamed here?

Originally posted by littledog
Click to expand...
Chris,

You make the ridiculous statement there is no need to look at the pictures, because all cable testers look more or less alike. (Fact: they don't!) Then you claim you are offended because you have already "conceded" the point that the Behringer and the Ebtech look alike.

I only asked how different can they be, really? I admitted to knowing preciously little about electronics in general, and by no means consider myself an expert on cable testers. Nor have I any experience with them. I was unaware how different they could be - hence the question. I really didn't think there would be that much difference between any two. Don't they simply send a signal up one side of a cable, and if the signal comes back and completes the circuit at the other end, then the light comes on? Please, let me know if I'm wrong here. It IS a question.

The configuration of the physical characteristics between the two units is way beyond either coincidence or the fact that they both happen to be cable testers. If are going blithely post uninformed opinions, and then refuse to seriously consider any contrary evidence, then it seems you are more interested in creating a controversy than in having any serious discussion.

The only opinion I suggested was that the external physical appearance of one product being the same as another does not, to me, suggest that the two products are, in fact, the same. I said show me the insides, and that would be a stronger arguement. Why is this so controversial? Where is there any contrary evidence (ie. evidence beyond their similar external similar appearances)?

No one says you are obligated to take anyone's word for anything, or that you should conform to the majority opinion. But when you raise issues and people give you enough respect to take the time to actually steer you towards pertinent evidence, and then you blow them off because you couldn't be bothered...
well, it just shows you have no respect for most of us here.

The only pertinent evidence you seem to be referring to here is the fact that there were links to photos of two cable testers, and that the links clearly showed that the units looked essentially the same. Given my arguement above, that two units that LOOK the same AREN'T NECESSARILY the same, I have a hard time considering this as evidence. Show me the inside, and you'd have a stronger arguement. If he says they look the same, why is it so wrong for me to take his word for it?

So if that's the case, why even bother to hang out here? Is the thrill of being annoying that compelling? Unfortunately, you have neither the wit or knowledge of, say, a Sweetnubs, to make your presence around here interesting...

Maybe you should find someplace else to practice boring the hell out of people... [/QUOTE]

The fact that you resort to personal attacks speaks volumes about your character. I won't resort to the same.

Chris
 
Because, if you had bothered to spend 10% of the time practicing your eloquence in simply looking at the two products, you would see that they are not "similar", not "functionally equivalent"...
the exterior layout and design is EXACTLY the same. Not close, not approximate... EXXXXXXXXACTLY!!!!!!!!!

Now, they may or may not use cheaper components on the inside, but they still did an complete and exact rip-off of the design. Doesn't this bother you just a little bit?

If you created a nice sports car, and someone else ripped off your design and made an exact replica, except they taped over the Tondreau logo and substituted their own name... would it make you feel better if someone said "well, maybe the engine has a couple of more plastic parts than the original?"

Perhaps I was a little harsh with you, but if you are too intellectually lazy to view incontrovertable evidence, then you shouldn't waste everyone's time by pretending that you are actually interested in discussing the points you originally raised.

The issue is not how important a cable tester is in the grand scheme of the universe. The issue is corporate ethics and blatant thievery, and how that ultimately affects the incentive to bring new and innovative products to the marketplace. And that IS an issue that seriously affects all of us.
 
The issue is not how important a cable tester is in the grand scheme of the universe. The issue is corporate ethics and blatant thievery, and how that ultimately affects the incentive to bring new and innovative products to the marketplace. And that IS an issue that seriously affects all of us.
Click to expand...

IMHO: Perhaps your right and Behringer’s policies will affect the incentive for manufactures to research new and innovative (and overpriced) products to the market. But I feel that the long term result of the aggressive competition Behringer brings to the market will be that you and I will pay less money for the ‘innovative’ gear.

I do agree that Behringer seems to have blatantly ripped off a few designs, and I agree this is wrong… but how much does that swizz army tester cost? $149? To me, charging that price for a simplistic product is as much if not more of a sin then what Behringer is doing. So in a way, good for Behringer for making it at a fraction of the price (39 bucks) but next time disguise the reverse engineering a little better.

Everyone is so focused on demonizing Behringer and pointing out all the bad stuff that they do… But perhaps such a position is a little one sided. You would think some people were on the Swizz Army payroll or something… j/k :)

All companies making gear are out for our money, and IMO Behri is giving the most product on a per dollar basis. After seeing companies like focusright charge hundreds of dollars for a red plate to cover an empty rack space, I think I can forgive behri for reverse engineering their mic pre, but that’s just my opinion. I would rather Behri rip off other companies than other companies rip off us home recorders, dont you agree?


Gunther,
- The Behringer Lover -
 
Gunther,

unfortunately, i don't agree with anything you've said.

your argument would have lot more validity if you didn't resort to misleading arguments like comparing the list price of one item with the street price of another.

The Focusrite red faceplate is not a piece of gear, any more than most of the funk-logic products. They are novelty items, like you might buy in a joke shop. Like people who used to put Rolls-Royce hood ornaments on their VW beetles. If someone is dumb enough (or rich enough) to waste their money on useless crap, who cares what they pay?

Some day you might have a product to sell - maybe a CD you've released, or an invention you spent a lot of time and money researching. When some Chinese (or other) manufacturer releases your EXACT same product and sells it for 50% of what you are charging, I'm sure you will cheerfully that they are merely (according to your own arguments):

*protecting home users from being ripped off by your company
*helping to bring to market lower cost innovative gear


of course, if you should have a change of heart, and object, just remember that anyone who agrees with you must be on your payroll.

Also, reverse engineering, in the Swizzarmy case, does not enter into it. There is no "reverse engineering" in creating an exact duplicate. It is obvious that they went to the factory and simply paid them to do another manufacturing run of the product, but with their own name painted over the original logo. My, isn't that innovative!
 
These Behringer discussions are usually useless. Also, the "copying" arguments against Behringer are often misguided. However, I'll join in. :p


From the U.S. standpoint, a great thing about the U.S. economy is that it is capitalistic. Thus, if someone is overcharging for a product, or producing that product inefficiently, a competitor has every right to come in and sell the EXACT SAME product cheaper.

However, to promote the progress of science and useful arts, the govenment can secure for a limited time to authors and inventors, the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries (U.S. Constitution, Art. 1, Sec. 8).

This means, if someone actually does something innovative, they are allowed to protect it with patent, trademark, trade dress, or similar protections. Otherwise, a competitor is allowed to copy it.

As an engineer, many of my designs were definitely based on existing schematics. Why bother reinventing the wheel? All engineers use existing schematics as a foundation for their designs.

Regardless, most importantly is the significance of allowing competitors to copy existing products. This benefits the consumer by controlling prices. Otherwise, sellers would have monopolies on their products and the consumers would be forced to pay exorbinent prices.
 
Yo' brutha' Chris, let it go mannnn, just LET IT GO!!!:cool: ;) :cool:





Behringer sucks and that's all there is to it!!!


Sorry friend!:cool:
 
LOL @ Q.


Chris, I empathize with ya.

You've gone through over a page of posts where you concede that the two products may look exactly the same. You then get a ton of flames and personal attacks for not looking at the products. WTF? You already conceded that they look the same. Why do you have to look at the pictures to solidify you already agree with?

Your point is well taken that the products may be drastically different despite looking exactly the same.
 
Littledog:

My intention was not to mislead with the comparison of prices between the Behringer product and the Swizz Army product. After reading what you said, I looked around more and found the Swizz army piece for $99, which is still $60 more than the Behringer’s $39 price point. Behringer did a better job getting the device to us for less money.

My point is simply this: IMO, Recording gear is being sold at over-inflated prices. Competitively priced Behringer gear that performs well will (I hope) force other manufactures to reconsider what they charge for their gear. Behringer’s existence should cause companies to work harder to make good gear at a more reasonable price. I see this as a good thing. You say you disagree with everything I am saying, do you mean this also?
There are other companies that put out great gear for a reasonable price (M-audio comes to mind) they are all doing us a great service, IMO.

I don’t necessarily approve of product theft, nor do I have enough evidence to make an opinion on weather Behringer is actually committing product theft or not. I am not making any arguments in this case. If I made a product and someone else made the same thing, but cheaper… yeah I would be pissed. If I hit a deep fly but the outfielder caught it and got me out I would be pissed too. Manufacturing is a dirty game with tricky rules, and all companies, Swizz audio and Behringer alike, are out for the same thing, money. I’m not defending Behringer here, but I am not crucifying them either. There are courts to do that.

BTW:
The being on Swizz army payroll thing… the J/K after it meant just kidding. I am sure you knew that, but I did not want there to be any possibility of that line being taken personally. I enjoy a good discussion and have no hostile feelings at all, nor do I wish to create them.

Gunther
 
Lopp said:
These Behringer discussions are usually useless.
Click to expand...

I suspect that most of the people who support Behringer's business practices also feel its their God-given right to download free Metallica songs. I've never seen one of those people be convinced otherwsie. So, I wouldn't expect it here.
 
Lopp said:
Your point is well taken that the products may be drastically different despite looking exactly the same.
Click to expand...

Firstly, regardless of what's inside, they are identical on the outside. At the very least the outside has been copied. Copied. Get it? Copied. You can't possibly say that Behringer did not copy at least the outside.

Secondly, from looking at outside, all of the jacks, switches, buttons and lights are in the exact same places. In other words, much of what is inside *can* be deduced from the outside.

Thirdly, do you honestly think that they would completely copy the outdside, arrange to have all the jacks, switches, buttons and lights in exactly the same places on the inside, yet somehow manage to make the rest of the unit "drastically different" inside? It's likely not even possible. Even if it was, do you honestly think they would do it? If so, your head needs a shake.
 
Chris, when I see you in August, I'm gonna' give you ALL my Behringer Triangluar stick-on's that come's with every and all Beh products as a way to show you how I'm feelin' your pain!;) ;)
 
jslator said:
Firstly, regardless of what's inside, they are identical on the outside. At the very least the outside has been copied. Copied. Get it? Copied. You can't possibly say that Behringer did not copy at least the outside.

Secondly, from looking at outside, all of the jacks, switches, buttons and lights are in the exact same places. In other words, much of what is inside *can* be deduced from the outside.

Thirdly, do you honestly think that they would completely copy the outdside, arrange to have all the jacks, switches, buttons and lights in exactly the same places on the inside, yet somehow manage to make the rest of the unit "drastically different" inside? It's likely not even possible. Even if it was, do you honestly think they would do it? If so, your head needs a shake.
Click to expand...

well stated, js. i've been trying to make the same point for a while now, but i'm beginning to think it's like pissing into the wind.

i could hijack a truckload of stereo equipment and sell it out of the back of my van at 50% of the price you would find it at in a store. i could justify it by saying that "stereo equipment is overpriced, and i'd rather be ripping off the stereo manufacturers than letting them rip me off."

isn't that the exact same argument you are making? if not, please enlighten me as to the difference.

and Lopp, I think there is a difference, even if only in degree, between adapting proven designs or reverse-engineering technologies and producing an EXACT duplicate of a product where only the logo has been painted over, without even a pretense of making any changes.
 
Gunther said:


I don’t necessarily approve of product theft, nor do I have enough evidence to make an opinion on weather Behringer is actually committing product theft or not. I am not making any arguments in this case.
Click to expand...

Well, a couple of us TRIED to show you some hard evidence, only you decided without looking at it that it wasn't worth your time and effort, and didn't prove anything.

As jslator said: every dimension, every jack, every switch, every LED light, and every button are exactly duplicated. While you may say you take our word for it, there's something about actually seeing it with your own eyes that is far more compelling. If you ever held the products side by side in your hands, i doubt you would be in continued denial.
 
You got the wrong guy, I looked at the photos. I completely understand that they are the same product. I have little expectation that they would be different inside; it’s most likely an exact clone. The device is too small for it to be made much differently, the placing of the jacks and leds dictates the internal design (as mentioned above.)
But the 2 items being the same is not exactly hard proof that Behringer is a thief (not that I believe Behri is innocent!)
Here are a few possibilities I can think of:

1) A vendor in the east created it for Swizz but without an exclusive purchase guarantee. Behringer contacted the vendor and made an agreement. totally legal.

2) Behringer brought the product to an Asian vendor and said, make this with our artwork. Or they did it in their own plant, if they have one. Might be called shady business, but done all the time by US and foreign companies.

3) Swizz made the product and put the Behringer name on it. Done all the time (Radio shack gear made by RCA, Sharp TVs with the Mitsubishi logo, etc.)

Someone seemed to imply in an above post that Swizz did not approve of Behringer’s product. Perhaps Swizz did not properly cover their ass, perhaps it’s a case of the bigger company being a bully. I don’t know. No clear facts on this.

What I do know is that Behringer gets us, me and you, the same product for cheaper and this is the only point I have been really pushing. WTF do I care about Swizz making money, it’s a stupid name anyway :) I would rather get a Behringer tester and spend the $60 I’ll save on something else, than get an overpriced Swizz unit.
Oh, and if anyone here is bitching about Behringer’s corporate bullying and theft while using a Microsoft product…. well I won’t go there but you should be very ashamed. The corporate world is ugly, I try to give it as little money as possible.


Gunther

- Don’t crucify Behringer for saving you and me money! -
 
jslator said:
Firstly, regardless of what's inside, they are identical on the outside. At the very least the outside has been copied. Copied. Get it? Copied. You can't possibly say that Behringer did not copy at least the outside.
Click to expand...

I completely agree.

Secondly, from looking at outside, all of the jacks, switches, buttons and lights are in the exact same places. In other words, much of what is inside *can* be deduced from the outside.
Click to expand...

Possibly. The leads and internal component locations may or may not be in the same locations (as Gunther alluded to). More importantly, it is more likely the components and manufacturers of the components are different. For example, based on Behringer's supposed quality control, I'm pretty sure Behringer uses components with crappier tolerances. Furthermore, supposedly the Swizz device is built like a tank and the Behringer device is flimsy. Thus, both manufactures definitely use different materials.

Therefore, regardless of the components on the inside being in the same location or not, it cannot be deduced that they are the same components.


Thirdly, do you honestly think that they would completely copy the outdside, arrange to have all the jacks, switches, buttons and lights in exactly the same places on the inside, yet somehow manage to make the rest of the unit "drastically different" inside? It's likely not even possible. Even if it was, do you honestly think they would do it? If so, your head needs a shake.
Click to expand...

Eh, the point of my post was that nobody was addressing this issue and that everyone was flaming Chris for something that was a non-issue.

All I said was "products may be drastically different despite looking exactly the same." Which is a possibility.
 
jslator said:
I suspect that most of the people who support Behringer's business practices also feel its their God-given right to download free Metallica songs. I've never seen one of those people be convinced otherwsie. So, I wouldn't expect it here.
Click to expand...

Now you're getting silly. Trying to impudiate beliefs in illegal practices onto Behringer supporters. I doubt that most Behringer supporters believe such.


Let's see if we can clarify:

Copying copyrighted songs is illegal.

Copying unprotected products is not and is an important part of capitalism.


I have see ZERO proof that Behringer has done ANYTHING illegal or infringed any intellectual property.


I'm not a huge Behringer fan. I have a couple of compressors and that's it. I just think its funny how Behringer gets attacked for things that can be resolved in court.

If you think court is a poor tribunal for determining guilt, consider how much better deliberations on a web page are.
:rolleyes: ;)
 
IMO.

I would rather see something that is a copy, identical in every way. For one, it means the original was worth something. Second, It means the functionality of the device will be close to the same. Regardless of how something looks, it must function, it must sound decent. If the guts had been duplicated and the outside was different, it would totally sway the market to behringers advantage just because of price. Imagine if a mic preamp by behringer showed up on the market for $995 and words gets around its awesome. Only come to find out its a Vipre on the inside down to the last detail. Which would do more damage to the vipre market?
Im not saying plagerism of intellectual property is right, but the audio industry is plum full of it. Even the "respectable" companies have plagerized to some extent. Anyone here own any Brent Averill mic pre's ? Did he invent the circuitry, did he hand make the caps and diodes from paper napkin sketches. Nope, he plagerized and made changes due to part availability issues. Does it cost $1300? I didn't think so.
There are alot of companies moving production to China or Korea because the labor wrap rate is 45% to 60% less. Mackie had to move, Woodenville is now a Yuppy farm where taxes skyrocketed. Boeing is planning on moving most of its manufacturing to Russia and China for the same reasons.
In fact these countries already make parts for Boeing, but the quality is still Boeing quality. I have 18 month to save for a new recorder and console, I have to split $3000 for the both of them. It sucks but Im tracking the MX9000 on Ebay, its cheap and I will probably hook it up with a HR24 or SDR24. Im looking at consumer level affordability, reasonable functionality. I even looked at Mackies. I see more Mackies on Ebay than anything? Why?
Intellectual rights don't always have legal protection in foreign countries, so I can see more and more Chinese made Pro audio stuff every year.

Maybe Ill get Lucky someday and get a exact copy of Neve vr80 for $19.95
I don't own any Mackie or Behringer Products. I don't own a cable tester, just a few volt/ohm meters. When I buy something, I want reliability above all else. If it sounds great but breaks down it isn't worth anything.
We all have different priorities. I have a family to feed.

SoMm
 
Whew.... ever feel that you're being attacked, and the fact that nobody else seems to notice or jump in only seems to suggest that everyone else on the planet probably thinks you deserve it? I was starting to feel like that. :( I really didn't believe I was being that unreasonable, and yet being flamed for it at the same time. Now that a few others have joined in, I feel not quite so alone here, if not a little vindicated.

Hey MrQ.... yeah, bring all those shiny stickers you don't want! :D That is, if you're not afraid of being caught with them yourself. You know.... "I was holding them for a friend..." ;)

Lopp... thanks for being the first person to acknowledge that I wasn't totally insane, seeing that I was trying to make a very simple and logical point, and recognizing that checking the links wasn't really all that necessary if I believed what he said to be true anyway, and coming to my defense. I was totally amazed that such a big deal was made about this.

Littledog... Thanks for the example of the car. In answer to your question, I would have to say that it would depend. Let's say the "Tondreau" car was a V12 diesel, fuel injected, manual steering and brakes, no air conditioning, and front wheel drive. Someone else takes EXXXXXACTLY the same body, including the same trimmings, seats, drivers console, etc. and slaps the "Littledog" brand name on it. If the "new" Littledog car is a hybrid gasoline/electric engine with power steering, power anti-lock brakes, air, cruise, tilt steering, and four-wheel drive, then I'm not pissed at all. It's a completely different product, regardless of what it looks like on the outside. On the other hand, if the new "Littledog" car was ALSO a V12 diesel, fuel injected, manual steering and brakes, no air conditioning, and front wheel drive, then I'd have a right to be pissed.

Herein starts the philosophical debate, to which there is no "right" answer - the old capitalist/socialist debate. Capitalist=make as much money as possible at any/all possible cost. Socialist=develop superior products to serve a common good. Generally, I consider myself a socialist in my ideaologies. However, in the short run, I don't have much money at the moment, and like SoMm, I too have a family to feed. Yeah, I'll buy the Behringer stuff.

You have a VERY valid arguement regarding the value of developing new products, and the value of intellectual property. On many levels, I totally agree with you. I BUY my CD's and my software, BTW. It is a rather socialist point of view.

Again, I'm dismayed by the character you present when you almost start to apologize for your personal attacks on me ("Perhaps I was a little harsh with you..."), but then follow that up with another personal attack. ("...if you are too intellectually lazy....")

It's not intellectual laziness. It's simply efficiency. If someone says something that you don't feel you need to question, and can accept as probably being true (particularly when cited with a reference - why would anyone cite a reference that DISproves what they have claimed, and thus make themself look like an idiot??), then why should one feel compelled to examine the evidence? If someone told you it was raining outside, and you had no reason to doubt them, would you get up and check for yourself to verify that it was, indeed, raining? However, if someone says something that you believe might not be true, and cites a reference, then it is prudent to check it out. If someone told me that Bob Seger was hired as the new bass player for Metallica and invited me to see for myself, via a link to the Metallica website, I would have a hard time NOT checking it for myself, just to satisfy my own disbelief.


I think I'm done here. I hear most of you sighing "Amen" from here ;) Me too....

Chris
 
Soooo fella's, what has been proven by this entire thread?

What conclusions have we arrived at?


And finally, ...........................................



......................What's the Moral of this Story!!??



:confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top