The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

GuoZh /Mini-TC

Status
Not open for further replies.

tcdeveau

Well-known member
what patent has been infringed?
making a view camera with geared movements is not an exclusive right belonging to any one manufacturer?
Registered US Patent Agent here. FYI, making a view camera absolutely can be an exclusive right (ie can be patented). A view camera with geared movements by itself is an abstract idea that cannot be patented, however one could patent:

a) method of making (ie constructing) a view camera with geared movements
b) one or more physical structures that provide the function of a view camera with geared movements (physical forms of view cameras with geared movements)
c) an aesthetic design of a view camera with geared movements

A patent on any one of a-c would provide an exclusive right for a period of time for a view camera with geared movements for the subject matter in the patent that gets allowed.
 
Last edited:

ErikKaffehr

Well-known member
Hi,

What about prior art?

A parallell question, what about things like say Hejnar Photo, that is a knock off from RRS, that is a knock of Kirk, that is a knock of from Arca Swiss?

That said, some knock offs are very similar to the original. I have a Novoflex adapter for my Hasselblad lenses so I can mount on the FE mount. That is a two part adapter.

I have a similar adapter from Kipon for my Pentax lenses. I can actually use the Kipon front on the Novoflex rear and the other way around. Matting on the Novoflex is better, so I prefer to use the rear part of the Novoflex with my Pentax lenses.

Best regards
Erik


Registered US Patent Agent here. FYI, making a view camera absolutely can be an exclusive right (ie can be patented). A view camera with geared movements by itself is an abstract idea that cannot be patented, however one could patent:

a) method of making (ie constructing) a view camera with geared movements
b) one or more physical structures that provide the function of a view camera with geared movements (physical forms of view cameras with geared movements)
c) a design of a view camera with geared movements

A patent on any one of a-c would provide an exclusive right for a period of time for a view camera with geared movements for the subject matter in the patent that gets allowed.
 

tcdeveau

Well-known member
Hi,

What about prior art?

A parallell question, what about things like say Hejnar Photo, that is a knock off from RRS, that is a knock of Kirk, that is a knock of from Arca Swiss?

That said, some knock offs are very similar to the original. I have a Novoflex adapter for my Hasselblad lenses so I can mount on the FE mount. That is a two part adapter.

I have a similar adapter from Kipon for my Pentax lenses. I can actually use the Kipon front on the Novoflex rear and the other way around. Matting on the Novoflex is better, so I prefer to use the rear part of the Novoflex with my Pentax lenses.

Best regards
Erik
Hi Erik,
Could you be more specific with your question? I'm not sure I understand but maybe the following answers your question:

Broadly, if one submits a patent application, prior art can prevent one from obtaining a patent if the prior art shows that the claims (the claims of a patent are what defines "the invention") of the patent one is trying to obtain isn't new or is obvious to one skilled in the art at the time of filing [the application]. Obviousness here means that it would be obvious "for one skilled in the art" to take the teachings of the prior art and come up with the claimed invention of the application that is filed at the time of filing. During the patent application process, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate that the prior art found by the patent examiner or patent examination office either is not applicable to the pending application for one reason or another, or the claims of the pending patent application have to be narrowed to exclude the prior art if it is applicable in a manner supported by the application as filed. Again, broadly, for something to be patented it has to be a new or non-obvious improvement over the prior art as most inventions these days are improvements over past technology. As far as knock-offs and infringement goes, I am not qualified to make commentary on infringement as I do not have a law degree (note that patent agents in the US are not required to have one).

-Todd
 

deng1130

New member
TS-E 17mm LENS /PHASE ONE P45+(up Shift 5mm)



TS-E 17mm LENS /PHASE ONE P45+((up Shift 5mm,Up and down Cut)



Carl Zeiss Biogon 38mm/f4.5 /PHASE ONE P45+(no LCC)

 

stephengilbert

Active member
In my view the question is not a legal one. Who cares whether China honors patents, or allows people to patent copies of other people's work?

The issue to me is the theft of a design or idea. In my work, when you quote something, you cite it. You don't appropriate others' work as your own.
 

f8orbust

Active member
ALPA no patent,
GuoZh Have patent in China.
Just because something isn't patented or copyrighted is totally irrelevant.

If someone leaves their front door unlocked, that doesn't mean you can go into their house and steal their belongings, does it ?

The weirdest thing is that you really seem to think that these are your own, original, designs.

They are not.

You saw what someone else did, copied it, and are now passing it off as your own work.

The only thing you didn't steal was the name, but that doesn't change a thing.
 
Just because something isn't patented or copyrighted is totally irrelevant.

If someone leaves their front door unlocked, that doesn't mean you can go into their house and steal their belongings, does it ?

The weirdest thing is that you really seem to think that these are your own, original, designs.

They are not.

You saw what someone else did, copied it, and are now passing it off as your own work.

The only thing you didn't steal was the name, but that doesn't change a thing.
17 years ago a Chinese company called Tencent copied ICQ's idea and design, and by copying and stealing, today Tencent has become the number one giant of IT in China.
 

ErikKaffehr

Well-known member
Hi,

It is not that easy… Who has invented the optical bench camera? You can take a patent on technical details, but there is probably 'prior art' where somebody used a similar solution.

Yes, some of these cameras remind a lot of Alpa designs, but I am very far from sure that Alpa was not leaning on inventions of others.

Best regards
Erik

In my view the question is not a legal one. Who cares whether China honors patents, or allows people to patent copies of other people's work?

The issue to me is the theft of a design or idea. In my work, when you quote something, you cite it. You don't appropriate others' work as your own.
 

MrSmith

Member
It's been going on for years, look at all the Leica copies over the years and cameras like Horseman which were very similar to linhof and sinar.
 

f8orbust

Active member
Hi,
Yes, some of these cameras remind a lot of Alpa designs ...
They remind you of Alpa designs ?!@?!

Wow.

With all due respect, either you've got a terrible memory, or the last time you looked at the Alpa website must be like 10 years ago.

The cameras are not reminiscent of Alpa's designs. They are Alpa's designs (albeit obtained via reverse engineering).

Jim
 

kdphotography

Well-known member
Well, I do notice on the Alpa TC images above that Alpa has the trademark symbol on their name---so GuoZh they didn't steal the name from Alpa. Eh, so they got that going for them. :rolleyes:

No lead paint either, right? ;)
 

jimban

New member
Hi-

These are generic designs that have been around for decades in many variants. Generally I prefer brand names to generics but there is no guarantee that one will be better than another. I own Alpa gear betting that the engineering and fabrication is more precise, but I've been known to be wrong from time to time....

jim
 

f8orbust

Active member
Hi-
These are generic designs that have been around for decades in many variants...
You mean generic in the sense that a lens attaches to a body which attaches to a film back / digital sensor ? Otherwise known as ... what is it ... it'll come to me any second ... oh yes, I know: 'a camera'.

This isn't like some prescription med with an expired patent that can be knocked out in a generic version in order to make it more affordable / widely available. This guy isn't some good Samaritan performing a public service. He's flagrantly ripping off companies (in this case Alpa and Cambo), where people have dedicated their working lives, along with significant sums of money, into the R&D necessary to produce these superb cameras and the support network (dealerships, trade show appearances etc.) that goes along with them.

And then along comes a kid with a set of calipers (or these days a cheap laser scanner) and a copy of SolidWorks (probably pirated) and they turn out this junk in, what, a week ?

And that's acceptable ?

Jim
 

yaya

Active member
I agree; but just what form that 'solution' takes can be protected by a patent.

Of course, a patent is only meaningful if you have the means ($$) to protect it. This is why we get stuff like this:



While here's the real deal:

Surely you have noticed the use of black Allen screws instead of SS Torx ones...and the different type of wood for the handle...oh and the logo as well!!!
What annoys me with this kind of threads is that you see folks actually showing interest in a knock-off and by doing that encourage more of this "phenomenon"...
:banghead:
If I was the moderators, I'd seriously consider removing this thread and issuing a ban warning to the OP...
 
What annoys me with this kind of threads is that you see folks actually showing interest in a knock-off
I have no interest in the knock-off Alpa camera bodies and I do not support that kind of plagiarism.

However their Canon TS-E lens conversion into Alpa mount is still one of a kind innovation and the best solution I've seen so far (apart from the quality control which is still to be validated).
 

deng1130

New member
Customer order: Carl Zeiss Biogon 38mm/f4.5 LENS 6° pitch function

Transformation of the Carl Zeiss Biogon 38mm/f4.5 lens,Contrast the performance of SWC in digital back: Edge quality is improved lot, red shift is very slight.





 

stephengilbert

Active member
D'oh is right.

Just an F U to those who worry about ethics.

I checked the ALPA list of stolen gear. At least the lenses weren't stolen from ALPA. Just the designs.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top