Comment on Palworld confirms ‘disappointing’ game changes forced by Pokémon lawsuit
SinAdjetivos@lemmy.world 1 day agoevery good, innovative US or EU product die immediately due to China/India making a 1:1 copy and flooding the markets with it?
If it’s a perfect 1:1 copy why does it matter? Can you explain how this isn’t just a stance rooted in xenophobia?
Enjoy innovative products that startups create? How about not having any of that because as soon as a startup makes something, a big corp comes in with their money, steals the idea, and floods the market?
You just described the dream of most startups. The goal of the vast majority is to be acquired by a big corp so that their idea/product can continue growing, because without acquisition growth is severely limited.
Alaknar@lemm.ee 1 day ago
First of all: very often it’s literally a 1:1 copy.
Secondly: imagine you make an innovative product. I don’t know, automatic fence painter, whatever. It sells well, but you don’t have the money to start a large-scale production, you’re doing OK with sales and are looking for investors, but things are fairly slow. In comes a Chinese dude, buys one auto-painter from you, brings it home, dismantles the thing, copies everything (potentially making some changes), and starts a massive-scale production in his factory. Due to the mass-production, worse materials, and lower labour costs, he sells the product at 20% the price of yours. The market is saturated with his knock-off, you’re left with zero money.
Is this xenophobia to you? Or someone stealing your product and killing your business?
Yeah, I’m not talking about them being acquired. What gave you that idea? I specifically used the words “steals their idea”.
SinAdjetivos@lemmy.world 14 hours ago
Do you know why there doesn’t exist automated fencepost painters? As bad as this sort of stuff is in software world it’s soooo much worse in hardware world. The licensing fees for every single little piece of IP that go into it would nickel and dime even large businesses out of building anything like that. Sure there’s also technical difficulties with building one, but those are surmountable. However, a business model that could survive the constant threats of litigation, licensing fees and turn even a mild profit does not exist.
Yes, because you just described what businesses throughout the Western world do to your mythical small business and projected it onto some mythical far east.
You do realize that is the point of IP right? To allow legalized theft in this exact manner? In the exact article this comment chain is discussing palworld did their due diligence to verify they weren’t violating any of Nintendo’s IP and then Nintendo modified their patent filing so that they were with the express goal of stealing their product.
Alaknar@lemm.ee 14 hours ago
I’m just impressed that you managed to miss the point by so much.
Correct. Which is precisely why copyright law was established in the first place and why companies like Facebook, Google or Amazon were able to become what they were without Microsoft or Apple just copy-pasting what they did.
The copyright laws are not perfect, far from it. But they give smaller companies SOME form of defence against the corps.
Do you also believe that the Earth is flat?
Yes, like I said: the copyright laws are not perfect. But saying that it would better WITHOUT ANY COPYRIGHT LAWS is insanity.
SinAdjetivos@lemmy.world 4 hours ago
Microsoft did copy and paste though: Yammer, Bing and Azure respectively. Apple tried with Ping/eWorld, Safari/Spotlight but didn’t really get into the web host space. Also worth mentioning the duopoly nature of those 2 specifically.
Rather telling that all your examples are Fortune 500 companies?
That’s a rather impressive hay golem you’ve built there.
We’re not talking copyright laws, we’re talking patent laws and you have yet to explain why it would be insane without changing scope or inventing fanciful scenarios.