Why I hate clones (and so should you)
- Thread starter carrot
- Start date
DM51
Flashaholic
If you buy a clone, you are rewarding a thief who has stolen a design.
Excellent post, carrot :thumbsup:
Excellent post, carrot :thumbsup:
JaguarDave-in-Oz
Enlightened
to relate this to torches - torches once were round and conform in shape generally to the length and shape of the batteries. This supposed need to create their "own" aesthetic is tiresome to me. So many little uselsss bumps, thin bits, square bits just to create a "unique" look takes away from the usefulness of the products. It's all a bit silly to me.
I'm a shallow person and have no care at all for how much success a company gathers. For me, once a product is created it either stands on its own two feet or it doesn't. If a "clone" can do the job then I say go the clone.
M@elstrom
Flashlight Enthusiast
Using that stand point all compatible aftermarket parts using any part of the original component's design (to ensure fitment/aesthetic continuity) is also in itself rewarding a design thief is it not? :thinking:
gcbryan
Flashlight Enthusiast
It's more efficient for me to buy the best product for me. If I choose to buy a flashlight made in another country and that results in me having more money in my pocket that's efficient as well.
That's extra money that will likely stay in my local community rather than in someone else's pocket who just happens to live in the same country that I do but is located 3,000 miles away.
It's also rewarding the company that supplied what I want. A copy of a Surefire is not a copy. If Surefire is about better materials and the clone isn't then it isn't a copy.
All flashlights look more or less the same or should anyway. Refrigerators all look the same but I don't see anyone claiming that one is a clone of the other. The only difference is where they're made.
If clone flashlights were made in California I'm guessing there wouldn't be this thread.
That's extra money that will likely stay in my local community rather than in someone else's pocket who just happens to live in the same country that I do but is located 3,000 miles away.
It's also rewarding the company that supplied what I want. A copy of a Surefire is not a copy. If Surefire is about better materials and the clone isn't then it isn't a copy.
All flashlights look more or less the same or should anyway. Refrigerators all look the same but I don't see anyone claiming that one is a clone of the other. The only difference is where they're made.
If clone flashlights were made in California I'm guessing there wouldn't be this thread.
kramer5150
Flashaholic
No way.
There are some things the design originators flat out stink at. Two off the top of my head are 18650 & RCR123 compatibility and brightest/warmest BIN emitters. Clones (and to a lesser degree offshore manufacturers) kick a$$ in these areas. No CPF'er should be forced to buy a pale/blue/dim light if they do not want to.
FWIW, my idea of a clone is any 1" diameter weapon mountable light, any P60 host, any light with attack / strike edges or tactical grip rings. As a Surefire fan, I would love to join the haters... but frankly, there are some things the clone designs do better, ruling them out across the board would eliminate some excellent lighting tools from my arsenal.
There are some things the design originators flat out stink at. Two off the top of my head are 18650 & RCR123 compatibility and brightest/warmest BIN emitters. Clones (and to a lesser degree offshore manufacturers) kick a$$ in these areas. No CPF'er should be forced to buy a pale/blue/dim light if they do not want to.
FWIW, my idea of a clone is any 1" diameter weapon mountable light, any P60 host, any light with attack / strike edges or tactical grip rings. As a Surefire fan, I would love to join the haters... but frankly, there are some things the clone designs do better, ruling them out across the board would eliminate some excellent lighting tools from my arsenal.
Last edited:
Hi M@elstrom, yes I did read the post I linked, however it was some time ago. But look at where IBM is now -- they've left the hardware market in commodity PC's completely! And Compaq, a once strong company, got bought by HP.
So, success in the short run. In the long run? Not so certain.
Solscud007
Flashlight Enthusiast
throwing in my 2 cents. As an avid collector of surefire lights. I welcome clones with a caveat.
L6 Porcupine. I bought one for a great price. Love that light. But too worried about losing it or it getting confiscated at the airport.
Then Fire Kylin knocks off the Porcupine. I was worried that it would ruin the value of my Porcupine.
Not so. the clone makes the porcupine more available to people who want one. But it did not diminish the value of my porcupine.
Two porcupines were sold very recently for a rather high price. $1500 and $1000. I sold mine for $1000.
So I think clones have their place but it takes someone to appreciate what they are and what they are good for.
L6 Porcupine. I bought one for a great price. Love that light. But too worried about losing it or it getting confiscated at the airport.
Then Fire Kylin knocks off the Porcupine. I was worried that it would ruin the value of my Porcupine.
Not so. the clone makes the porcupine more available to people who want one. But it did not diminish the value of my porcupine.
Two porcupines were sold very recently for a rather high price. $1500 and $1000. I sold mine for $1000.
So I think clones have their place but it takes someone to appreciate what they are and what they are good for.
JaguarDave-in-Oz
Enlightened
I'll stay away from surefire since I've never even seen one let alone used one nor ever likely will but as I see it, one problem with offering protection to "original designs" in regards to products is that it then falls to only the "original" company to make improvements and updates at their own pace and so the flow of enhanced technology can actually be slowed by the protection.
Once something's on the market it should be fair game. If the "original" company can make it better or for a better price then it will be a success for them, if not then the "clones" will do better.
For me there's too much modern day concentration on style and exclusivity and protecting designs just exacerbates that problem.
Once something's on the market it should be fair game. If the "original" company can make it better or for a better price then it will be a success for them, if not then the "clones" will do better.
For me there's too much modern day concentration on style and exclusivity and protecting designs just exacerbates that problem.
jacktheclipper
Enlightened
Competition is good for the consumer
Let the Market decide
The cream will rise to the top
Let the Market decide
The cream will rise to the top
By your logic, it is also okay to shoplift, because you are saving a few dollars. It is also okay to pirate movies, software, games and music, because you are saving a few dollars. By extension, it is okay to lie, cheat and steal to gain a few dollars, right? Because all you're losing is integrity.
JDIO, I would never dream of banning clones, or otherwise offering protection. I am far more in favor of diminishing copyright laws than you think. Clones have their place, as I mentioned in the very end, they keep the originator on their feet and make things affordable to those who could never afford the real thing. But it doesn't mean I have to like them.
I noticed your strong aversion to styling and brand image. You are missing the point. The point is, copying someone else's design is an excellent indicator of the copier's lack of ingenuity and is a great litmus test for the quality you can expect from said clone. You cannot expect innovation from someone who can't even innovate their own look.
Last edited:
I can't think of a more Pro Clone connection to make than that of computers.
I work in IT, and am a gamer, and have been a gamer for about 25 years... and I am SO glad clones came out.
Carrot your argument seems to be that (at least with computers) cloning is bad for big companies like IBM and Compaq... well I'm sorry if they're profit drops from hundred of millions down to tens of millions, but if it's good for every consumer in the market for a computer I don't see the problem. Especially when much of their decline is down to their inability to adapt to a fast changing industry. (oh wakey wakey Music and Film industry if you're reading this cos you didn't learn from their mistake.. in fact you're even slower! :P)
My first new computer was a $4000 apple //e (You'd be amazed how little you got for the money) and after that my next new computer was a $9000 NEC (again no way was if value for money). Around that time clones were just starting to come out... thank Goodness they did.
Not only did value for money increase, innovation did too. It had to because you couldn't force computers buys to by your produce due to them having no other options. Sure there are some duds, but the only cost I can see is a requirement to do the smallest amount of research before parting with your money).
Alternatively, if you want to see lack of innovation and customer care, and pricing bordering on extortion, then look at our Telephone company before unbundling the local loop came in to force them to allow others to compete.
I work in IT, and am a gamer, and have been a gamer for about 25 years... and I am SO glad clones came out.
Carrot your argument seems to be that (at least with computers) cloning is bad for big companies like IBM and Compaq... well I'm sorry if they're profit drops from hundred of millions down to tens of millions, but if it's good for every consumer in the market for a computer I don't see the problem. Especially when much of their decline is down to their inability to adapt to a fast changing industry. (oh wakey wakey Music and Film industry if you're reading this cos you didn't learn from their mistake.. in fact you're even slower! :P)
My first new computer was a $4000 apple //e (You'd be amazed how little you got for the money) and after that my next new computer was a $9000 NEC (again no way was if value for money). Around that time clones were just starting to come out... thank Goodness they did.
Not only did value for money increase, innovation did too. It had to because you couldn't force computers buys to by your produce due to them having no other options. Sure there are some duds, but the only cost I can see is a requirement to do the smallest amount of research before parting with your money).
Alternatively, if you want to see lack of innovation and customer care, and pricing bordering on extortion, then look at our Telephone company before unbundling the local loop came in to force them to allow others to compete.
Last edited:
Locoboy5150
Flashlight Enthusiast
- Joined
- Nov 3, 2009
- Messages
- 1,102
I'm new to this subject of cloned flashlights. What is considered a "clone" to flashaholics? There are many lights that are not the first of their type on the market, but they are a little bit different than what is already out. Are those considered clones?
Or are we talking about fake merchandise where company B makes a light that is a direct copy of company A's light and is sold under company A's name. Is that considered a clone?
Or are we talking about fake merchandise where company B makes a light that is a direct copy of company A's light and is sold under company A's name. Is that considered a clone?
And, in the end you pays yo money and yo takes yo choice.
Competition is good for consumers.
Is there competition in gasoline industry, medical services, cable tv service??
So we end-up paying more than we should have to. Ever run-into
total arrogance by the vendor? Believe it when A Large sporting goods
store here went belly-up not even one year later. Manager was an
anal sphincter---lost his job.
Financial resources are not infinite for most of us.
End of rant. lovecpf
Competition is good for consumers.
Is there competition in gasoline industry, medical services, cable tv service??
So we end-up paying more than we should have to. Ever run-into
total arrogance by the vendor? Believe it when A Large sporting goods
store here went belly-up not even one year later. Manager was an
anal sphincter---lost his job.
Financial resources are not infinite for most of us.
End of rant. lovecpf
gcbryan
Flashlight Enthusiast
Carrot, actually I thought Brigadier was being sarcastic and was in agreement with you (I could be wrong).
I disagree however. Integrity has nothing to do with this subject. No laws are being broken. It's not in our best interest to buy Surefire rather than some other brand.
The cheaper lights aren't original looking because they are going to the inexpensive end of the market where people aren't willing to pay large premiums for a unique look for a flashlight.
This thread would make more sense if the (and so should you) portion of the title were left out.
I disagree however. Integrity has nothing to do with this subject. No laws are being broken. It's not in our best interest to buy Surefire rather than some other brand.
The cheaper lights aren't original looking because they are going to the inexpensive end of the market where people aren't willing to pay large premiums for a unique look for a flashlight.
This thread would make more sense if the (and so should you) portion of the title were left out.
JaguarDave-in-Oz
Enlightened
I might be missing YOUR point but that's because I don't actually agree that you've hit THE point (see the distinction?). I miss your point because I see things differently.
Sometimes someone may just copy a design (and what constitutes a "design" is well open to semantic debate) due to lack of ingenuity but it may also be for a dozen other reasons.
Manufacturers "make" products, that's their thing. They often don't care where the "design" comes from or how "ingenious" it is. They just want to make and sell a product for a profit. There is nothing other than assumption to say that a copying producer must make something of lesser quality than the original "designer" does.
Only one person can "invent" the LED torch. Only one person can "invent" the gold cased gold braceleted watch. Only one person can "invent" penicillin. Once that's done, others can only tinker around the edges or change the "style" but that's no reason for them not to be involved in manufacturing or selling products based on that original invention nor improving upon them. Innovation can be good if it leads to new things but it can be a completely useless waste of time, money and endeavour when it's simply used to make one thing look or seem different from something else that's essentially the same product so that it can be called "unique".
All that time that's spent re-inventing the wheel could be spent improving it instead, but to do that the western world's view would have to change to allow us to freely build upon someone else's original design rather than have to come up with our own "design" of the same thing so as to avoid patent suits and the like.
Last edited:
Well, what does a clone clone?
Build quality?
No. Clones rarely have the build quality to match the original, so if you want that, then you'll have to get the original.
Funtionality?
Not really. If it has any special UI, the clone isn't likely to have it, and would instead have a generic reverse clicky with a generic X-mode driver. Anything special like infinite variabilty or a Smart Ring isn't likely to be on the clone because it's hard to make and would make it expensive.
You could cite things like 'throwy reflector' as part of functionality, but they could just copy the reflector curvature and nobody would call it a clone.
Brand identity/warranty/customer service?
Definitely not.
Compatibility on a common platform?
Yes. However, while this might even be damaging to the original manufacturer, having some sort of standard is very good for the consumer and the market. Who wants to live in a world where nothing is compatible and you can only change what the manufacturer is willing to sell to you (except they won't, because the costs are too high for small markets)?
This can also benefit the company in ways. How many people who have thought 'The surefire 6P looks great, but I don't like the LED that comes with it' but then bought one because someone stole their P60 design and made a better dropin?
Almost the only thing you get with a clone is a similar appearance - you lose everything else, so the sort of person who is getting a clone would basically say "That looks OK but I don't put any value on the actual features, I want something generic and inexpensive" and obviously doesn't value the extra quality, functionality, customer service, etc, that comes with the original. Such a person isn't likely to buy the original in the first place, whether or not the clone exists. Except in the rare case where a clone actually comes very close to the orginal product.
Build quality?
No. Clones rarely have the build quality to match the original, so if you want that, then you'll have to get the original.
Funtionality?
Not really. If it has any special UI, the clone isn't likely to have it, and would instead have a generic reverse clicky with a generic X-mode driver. Anything special like infinite variabilty or a Smart Ring isn't likely to be on the clone because it's hard to make and would make it expensive.
You could cite things like 'throwy reflector' as part of functionality, but they could just copy the reflector curvature and nobody would call it a clone.
Brand identity/warranty/customer service?
Definitely not.
Compatibility on a common platform?
Yes. However, while this might even be damaging to the original manufacturer, having some sort of standard is very good for the consumer and the market. Who wants to live in a world where nothing is compatible and you can only change what the manufacturer is willing to sell to you (except they won't, because the costs are too high for small markets)?
This can also benefit the company in ways. How many people who have thought 'The surefire 6P looks great, but I don't like the LED that comes with it' but then bought one because someone stole their P60 design and made a better dropin?
Almost the only thing you get with a clone is a similar appearance - you lose everything else, so the sort of person who is getting a clone would basically say "That looks OK but I don't put any value on the actual features, I want something generic and inexpensive" and obviously doesn't value the extra quality, functionality, customer service, etc, that comes with the original. Such a person isn't likely to buy the original in the first place, whether or not the clone exists. Except in the rare case where a clone actually comes very close to the orginal product.
Last edited:
rookiedaddy
Enlightened
+1
Perhaps Carrot should put or link to some actual flashlight "clones" that he is referring to...
I don't think you can blame it on clones, the demise of IBM and Compaq machines largely due to mis-management and miss-opportunity.
Allow me to quote iPhone's boss once "quoting": "...Good artists copy great artists steal..." :devil:
Last edited:
was.lost.but.now.found
Enlightened
I don't know how much of this confusion is my own and how much is due to the acknowledged ambiguity by the OP ("please don't use names") but I'm at a loss for clone vs. counterfeit. I have a hunch I know when you all are going, but maybe my lack of understanding is due to the fact that I haven't really bought many "budget" lights. Or are some implying that there are major labels with a CPF presence which also fit into the "clone" wars discussion?
Based on my own loose understanding at current time of what I think "clone" means, I don't see the point. So a clone is cheap, works off the backs of other flashlight innovators, and doesn't provide the quality found in the preferred brands. I've got news for you, that's 99% of what's sold in B&M stores which probably accounts for the majority of flashlight sales for the general public who will never even know what CPF is, nor will they care.
Based on my own loose understanding at current time of what I think "clone" means, I don't see the point. So a clone is cheap, works off the backs of other flashlight innovators, and doesn't provide the quality found in the preferred brands. I've got news for you, that's 99% of what's sold in B&M stores which probably accounts for the majority of flashlight sales for the general public who will never even know what CPF is, nor will they care.
