Copy Cats and Market Shift

If you're getting C&Ds repeatedly for your products, I'd say you're duping them - perhaps a little too closely. CaD literally stands for "Cease And Desist." 9 was another, until Hoppe's got wind of it. Then there's Twee! with three names. It's also a bit disingenuous to only list a handful that are "semi-unique" as you say. Here's a more accurate and complete list of dupes:

- CaD (Barbasol; formerly "Barber Soul" - C&D issued)
- 11235 (4711)
- Aqua Dulce (Florida Water)
- Home on the Range (Hoppe's No. 9, formerly "9" - C&D issued)
- Sun Down (Sun Up)
- Twee! (Green Irish Tweed, formerly "Irish Tweed" then "Tweed" - C&D issued)
- Aqua DG (Acqua di Gio)
- Sacré Bleu (Aqua Velva)
- Steeplechase Sport (Polo Sport)
- Han Polo (Polo)
- Cold Spices (Old Spice)
- Alt-Eleven (Alt Innsbruck)
- Lo Haiku (Hai Karate)
- Aqua D (Acqua di Colonia)
- Clubguy (Pinaud Clubman)
- Déjà Fougère (Fougère Royale)
- King R. Emporium (Gillette)
- Irish Springs (Irish Spring)

Though I would agree; there's nothing wrong with recreating long lost scents. That's kinda cool, actually - as long as they're accurate. I find B&M Barrister's Reserve to excel in this regard, as the scents are as accurate as can possibly be created today (some original components are no longer allowed, for example).

As for hardware, as Yaqi so rightly pointed out regarding the "Doc" razor - expired patents means anyone can clone it. You, them or anyone else.

Not having seen the specific cease and desist letters , I'm guessing that many of those if not all that BoarderPhreak refers to were because the name was too similar to the original trademark protected name - trademark owners get picky about that.

I don't have a problem with aftershave that is "inspired" by or pays "homage" to an existing product. There is no deception and usually they aren't exact replicas. What I have a problem with is buying a bottle of Chanel pour Homme (for example) and not knowing if its the real thing or a knockoff/counterfiet product. Or a branded product that is a counterfeit. Lots of brands have problems with this - jordan basketball shoes for example. Fake Rolex watches. Its a multi billion dollar global criminal enterprise.

A lot of what is going on is fair game although maybe unscrupulous - its pretty much impossible to patent a new DE razor today - the Patent Act has various requirements but the most problematic one would be showing that you've created a "novel" DE razor. One that is different in a practical way that distinguishes it from all the "prior art". Unless you're putting a laser beam on the thing I don't know how you'd meet the test. Design elements, even radical ones wouldn't be enough. So whatever you make, someone else can copy. You might be able to get copyright protection for industrial design elements but thats grasping. And really, we're all riffing on variations of Gillette's then novel safety razor invention and his patents are long expired.

Notwithstanding its limitations I'm still a believer in a strong, traditional statutory intellectual property protection regime as well as the conventional capitalist approach to raising capital to finance business ventures - including strong company and securities laws and regulations. Crowd funding is nice and is fine for raising money to fund specific, low cost projects but seriously, most people aren't content to give their money to somebody they know nothing about on the internet who wants to make a razor or a set of snore blocking headphones. The serious kind of money required to fund the R&D for modern pharmaceuticals has to be raised in the traditional way fro investors looking for a return on their investments and depending on the relative safety of the laws and regulations of a stable capital market. You can point to all sorts of inefficiencies and pathologies with the system but its the best we have at the moment. I'll wait until I see Airbus or Boeing crowd fund the next generation of airliner before I take that seriously as the future of business finance.

I agree.  For small to medium players it really provides no practical protection.  People seem to think that there are patent police who go around enforcing patents.  There aren't, its a purely self help and self funded process.  Its a lot of time and money to prepare and prosecute a patent application and it has to be done in each country you want to sell your product (or stop others from ripping you off) and at the end of the day all you really get is some ego gratification for the inventor who can say he has patents - the fact that its infringed with impunity is another matter.  It really is a problem because innovation drives the economy and future progress and the inability to adequately protect IP is a major obstacle.

You are correct.  Protecting our patents has been a battle of diligence in notifying potential violators, litigation brought to those who violate, and dollars spent at the attorneys to protect and uphold the patents and copyrights.  It gets easier with each battle won and additional precedence set but wow what a battle.  I would assume we have spent more money protecting our property than a smallish artisan gross' in a year.

Exactly!

Not having seen the specific cease and desist letters , I'm guessing that many of those if not all that BoarderPhreak refers to were because the name was too similar to the original trademark protected name - trademark owners get picky about that.  

I don't have a problem with aftershave that is "inspired" by or pays "homage" to an existing product.  There is no deception and usually they aren't exact replicas. What I have a problem with is buying a bottle of Chanel pour Homme (for example) and not knowing if its the real thing or a knockoff/counterfiet product.  Or a branded product that is a counterfeit.  Lots of brands have problems with this - jordan basketball shoes for example. Fake Rolex watches.  Its a multi billion dollar global criminal enterprise.

A lot of what is going on is fair game although maybe unscrupulous - its pretty much impossible to patent a new DE razor today - the Patent Act has various requirements but the most problematic one would be showing that you've created a "novel" DE razor.  One that is different in a practical way that distinguishes it from all the "prior art".  Unless you're putting a laser beam on the thing I don't know how you'd meet the test.  Design elements, even radical ones wouldn't be enough.  So whatever you make, someone else can copy.  You might be able to get copyright protection for industrial design elements but thats grasping.  And really, we're all riffing on variations of Gillette's then novel safety razor invention and his patents are long expired.  

Notwithstanding its limitations I'm still a believer in a strong, traditional statutory intellectual property protection regime as well as the conventional capitalist approach to raising capital to finance business ventures - including strong company and securities laws and regulations.  Crowd funding is nice and is fine for raising money to fund specific, low cost projects but seriously, most people aren't content to give their money to somebody they know nothing about on the internet who wants to make a razor or a set of snore blocking headphones.  The serious kind of money required to fund the R&D for modern pharmaceuticals has to be raised in the traditional way fro investors looking for a return on their investments and depending on the relative safety of the laws and regulations of a stable capital market.  You can point to all sorts of inefficiencies and pathologies with the system but its the best we have at the moment.  I'll wait until I see Airbus or Boeing crowd fund the next generation of airliner before I take that seriously as the future of business finance.

Correct

If you're getting C&Ds repeatedly for your products, I'd say you're duping them - perhaps a little too closely. CaD literally stands for "Cease And Desist." 9 was another, until Hoppe's got wind of it. Then there's Twee! with three names. It's also a bit disingenuous to only list a handful that are "semi-unique" as you say. Here's a more accurate and complete list of dupes:

- CaD (Barbasol; formerly "Barber Soul" - C&D issued)
- 11235 (4711)
- Aqua Dulce (Florida Water)
- Home on the Range (Hoppe's No. 9, formerly "9" - C&D issued)
- Sun Down (Sun Up)
- Twee! (Green Irish Tweed, formerly "Irish Tweed" then "Tweed" - C&D issued)
- Aqua DG (Acqua di Gio)
- Sacré Bleu (Aqua Velva)
- Steeplechase Sport (Polo Sport)
- Han Polo (Polo)
- Cold Spices (Old Spice)
- Alt-Eleven (Alt Innsbruck)
- Lo Haiku (Hai Karate)
- Aqua D (Acqua di Colonia)
- Clubguy (Pinaud Clubman)
- Déjà Fougère (Fougère Royale)
- King R. Emporium (Gillette)
- Irish Springs (Irish Spring)

Though I would agree; there's nothing wrong with recreating long lost scents. That's kinda cool, actually - as long as they're accurate. I find B&M Barrister's Reserve to excel in this regard, as the scents are as accurate as can possibly be created today (some original components are no longer allowed, for example).

As for hardware, as Yaqi so rightly pointed out regarding the "Doc" razor - expired patents means anyone can clone it. You, them or anyone else.

Ummm I received a few Cease and Desists in the past for artwork not scent duplication my friend as has FINE, Italian Barber and others. Had it been for scent as you suggest, I would no longer be selling them.I NEVER received a CnD for Tweed so I would appreciate you stop spreading that rumor right now. Also, it was only ever titled "Tweed" then "Twee". I have also Never done an Acqua De Colonia scent type either. I feel like I already explained my intent on all those in my last post...so I find this silly.
As I mentioned in my first posting on this thread I understand this is going to happen and I have accepted it, I also mentioned if I had never pulled the DOC out of obscurity no Chinese manufacturer would be selling it today. This has made me less interested in rebooting any other past shave gems...that was/is my point.

Was anyone else wondering when Boarder Phreak would show up? lol

Ummm I received a few Cease and Desists in the past for artwork not scent duplication my friend as has FINE, Italian Barber and others. Had it been for scent as you suggest, I would no longer be selling them.I NEVER received a CnD for Tweed so I would appreciate you stop spreading that rumor right now. As I mentioned in my first posting on this thread I understand this is going to happen and I have accepted it, I also mentioned if I had never pulled the DOC out of obscurity no Chinese manufacturer would be selling it. This has made me less interested in rebooting any other past gems...that was/is my point.

Was anyone else wondering when Boarder Phreak would show up? lol

I never said nor implied it was due to the scent (mainly how Dua, Alexandria and others get away with it). As for the artwork, yes, we know you like to play fast and loose with "derivative works" under copyright law. Corporations with trademarks to protect however, aren't very lenient. As for Twee! why was it renamed twice, then?

As for hardware, perhaps you're right... Yaqi might not have cloned that razor if you hadn't cloned it first.

But don't flatter yourself. I call BS wherever I see it, and I've always been here.

Ummm I received a few Cease and Desists in the past for artwork not scent duplication my friend as has FINE, Italian Barber and others. Had it been for scent as you suggest, I would no longer be selling them.I NEVER received a CnD for Tweed so I would appreciate you stop spreading that rumor right now. As I mentioned in my first posting on this thread I understand this is going to happen and I have accepted it, I also mentioned if I had never pulled the DOC out of obscurity no Chinese manufacturer would be selling it. This has made me less interested in rebooting any other past gems...that was/is my point.

Was anyone else wondering when Boarder Phreak would show up? lol

I never said nor implied it was due to the scent (mainly how Dua, Alexandria and others get away with it).  As for the artwork, yes, we know you like to play fast and loose with "derivative works" under copyright law.  Corporations with trademarks to protect however, aren't very lenient.  As for Twee! why was it renamed twice, then?

As for hardware, perhaps you're right...  Yaqi might not have cloned that razor if you hadn't cloned it first.  

But don't flatter yourself.  I call BS wherever I see it, and I've always been here.

"If you're getting C&Ds repeatedly for your products, I'd say you're duping them - perhaps a little too closely."
Silly me for thinking you were implying otherwise.

I have spoofed designs in the past, these are meant for people with a sense of humor, simple as that and nothing nefarious. I chose to rename Twee on my own, also simple as that, but I can assure you i never received a CaD. (And it was only renamed once, it was never Irish Tweed.)
BS transpires when you guess and speculate.

Silly me for thinking you were implying otherwise.

I have spoofed designs in the past, these are meant for people with a sense of humor, simple as that and nothing nefarious. I chose to rename Twee on my own, also simple as that, but I can assure you i never received a CaD. (And it was only renamed once, it was never Irish Tweed.)
BS transpires when you guess and speculate.

Where does that say anything specifically about scent? But yes, scent is part of it. As is artwork and name, even if it's a "spoof." Again, corporations with trademarks don't find that funny. But you're right; it was just Tweed before it was Twee! Still odd that you just chose to rename it... But whatever.

CaD314
I'm no perfumer but isn't getting a scent "close" still cumbersome and take time and work? To me this is vastly different than taking a razor someone else designs and merely scanning it in a CAD program and then changing the materials and sending it out under a different name. Software and CAD programs have made it virtually seamless to copy just about anything add 3d printing to the fold as well. Also isn't a hardware design much more costly to do and pull off and thus sales of that item much more crucial than on the software side of things? Seems to me any hardware release has a lot of moving parts many of which can go wrong and either screw up the razors looks, performance or both, and or alienate a large customer base with delays and the like. I just think most people here likely have 3-4 times the soaps and aftershaves than they have comparably to hardware. This would lead me to believe that sales of hardware are even more crucial to those who make them compared to software sales. You've done both and while speculation can be rampant on forums, I'd like your insight because you do this for a living!!

CaD314
I'm no perfumer but isn't getting a scent "close" still cumbersome and take time and work?  To me this is vastly different than taking a razor someone else designs and merely scanning it in a CAD program and then changing the materials and sending it out under a different name. Software and CAD programs have made it virtually seamless to copy just about anything add 3d printing to the fold as well.  Also isn't a hardware design much more costly to do and pull off and thus sales of that item much more crucial than on the software side of things?  Seems to me any hardware release has a lot of moving parts many of which can go wrong and either screw up the razors looks, performance or both, and or alienate a large customer base with delays and the like.  I just think most people here likely have 3-4 times the soaps and aftershaves than they have comparably to hardware. This would lead me to believe that sales of hardware are even more crucial to those who make them compared to software sales. You've done both and while speculation can be rampant on forums, I'd like your insight because you do this for a living!!  

Yes sir, it does take work, all of it does...and that's what I was trying to state clearly in my posts...but seemed to have failed at. lol

I have spent up to, if not over, 2 years on research and development for some of my hardware and as little as 8 months. This is partly due to the fact that I need to depend on others to get the job done. Fact is, unless you're on this side, it's easy to oversimplify what we as artisans and small vendors do, and I get that. I enjoy sharing what I have gleaned and my insights for those interested. Really not here to do battle or argue, just share what I have learned and experienced...but it seem some would rather derail the convo or change the topic.

That said, hardware has been huge for us in so many ways and we work hard at it, even if it is what I have been calling a "reboot", I still tweak it and eliminate what I think may be past design flaws. I have paid up to $1500 for just one prototype...some that I never proceeded with (like my CNC Machined adjustable brush). I am very passionate about the process and I think it shows. In the same week I saw the Yaqi DOC I also saw my scuttle being cloned...lol. It sucked, but it also told me we must be doing something right. Wherever there's a Mc Donald's, there's a Burger King.

Feel free to PM me bud if you ever have any other questions!

CaD314 Are you done trying to get into stores like Whole Foods?