18.02.2024 Copying - The Good, The Bad And The Ugly
The subject of copying other products or infringing patents and copyrights, has been around for as far back as most of us can recall. Every few years or so, it seems to come to the fore in the industries we cover. Usually when a new supplier or group of suppliers are accused of copying existing products, or when a well-established manufacturer claims a competitor has infringed one it its patents.
Patents were intended to provide protection to a person who came up with an original design, idea or breakthrough innovation, thus encouraging and rewarding progress by providing protection against ‘copycats’ stealing the idea – at least for the first few years, enabling the innovator to recoup their original investment and profit from the invention before everyone else piles in.
Patents are especially important for companies at the leading edge of research and development that spend vast amounts on new products, of which only a minority might will make it through the test and approval stages, as is the case for pharmaceutical companies that carry out a lot of original research.
However, we can never get away from patent abuse, which comes in several forms, such as well-established companies with deep pockets copying a smaller company’s idea, and then outlawyering and outspending them and thus getting away with it. Defending a patent infringement can be expensive and time consuming, with no guarantee of success. So small companies often give up and let the bully get away with it.
Then there are companies that spot a good idea from a niche supplier before the product has had any wide exposure and where a patent has not been applied for. If they succeed in patenting it for themselves, they can potentially exclude the inventor from their own idea. Yes, it has and does happen – usually unintendedly, when two people have a similar idea at the same time.
On the other side of the coin, there are those that manage to obtain a patent on an overall concept or something that is obvious, such as the wheel or the automobile. Officially an obvious solution cannot be patented, but it has happened. However, a patent for an overall concept can be very hard to defend if challenged.
If we look at our industry there have been some classic cases over the years, such as Superlift systems for telescopic crane booms, over centre front axle steering on scissor lifts and rear axle weight sensing on telehandlers.
Aside from patents, new manufacturers – at the moment they tend to be Chinese – are often accused of copying existing products. And yet, in some ways, this is almost inevitable, especially as products, such as small scissor lifts become more alike. But there are specifics, for example, Skyjack came up with the idea of swing-out trays for all of the componentry on a scissor lift. Now everyone has it. UpRIght invented and patented over centre, front axle steering on scissor lifts to maintain a fixed-width fulcrum – even though the latter had a valid patent, now everyone has it. Those that copied these ideas were not new ‘infiltrators’ they were well established competitors.
Newcomers accused of copying often turn to innovating their new ideas once they gain a foothold in a market. In my lifetime I have seen American, Japanese and now Chinese companies in the access industry accused of copying – it’s nothing new. But would it stop you buying from a manufacture which you think has simply copied existing producers?
A great deal will depend on the quality of the ‘copied’ product and the trust and confidence you have in the company producing and selling it. No one wants a cheap and nasty copy, which is just a ‘fake’.
Let us know what you think in our online poll.
Comments