Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I think it's bad if the average consumer cannot tell the difference between an Apple product and a Samsung product. Right now Samsung is trying hard to look like a cheaper apple product -- they have the same "white" apple stores with an equivalent genius bar (smart tutors), and they even reuse apple icons at their physical store wall paper (safari icons, etc). Their boxes and cables are identical to Apple's, they made their onscreen keyboard identical (same white/blue style -- even the shading is identical). Some of Samsung's products will even fit in 3rd party Apple addons that make use of the 30 pin dock.

I honestly don't think a new consumer will be able to easily differentiate between the 2 products. My mom calls everything an ipad even if it's not -- I don't think she would know that she's buying a galaxy tablet and not an ipad.

I don't think copying drives innovation. If cloning products drove innovation, we'd see a ton of China companies making innovative products, but most of them just clone some website in the US, slap on a few features, and that's it.

The China company that cloned Impactjs pixel-per-pixel did not provide anything additional other than providing the same service at half the price.

If Samsung wins here, it's basically setting a precedent for future companies to clone anything successful. We'll probably see a lot more Chinese companies cloning YC startups without worrying about lawsuits.



If Samsung wins here... We'll probably see a lot more Chinese companies cloning YC startups without worrying about lawsuits.

You assume:

* That there is a law which prevents startups from being cloned.

* That Chinese companies would care about such a law even if it existed.

* That a YC startup could do anything about it even if the prior two points were affirmative.

You're 0 for 3.


> Some of Samsung's products will even fit in 3rd party Apple addons that make use of the 30 pin dock.

In this particular point, Samsung is 100% in the right. Interoperability is one of the explicit justifications for copying. Vendor lock-in is nor protected by law, and is one of Apple's borderline-illegal monolopy-protecting tactics.


I don't think copying drives innovation. If cloning products drove innovation, we'd see a ton of China companies making innovative products

KirinDave's point wasn't that cloners innovate themselves, but that they force others to keep innovating to stay in ahead of the pack.


>"I think it's bad if the average consumer cannot tell the difference between an Apple product and a Samsung product."

Apple just might be the strongest brand in history and is the most valuable corporation on the planet. Their products are must-haves. Are people really getting confused? Are people really going to settle for a "cheaper" brand, rather than the real thing?

If that's true, it's astonishing.


i don't consider _any_ Apple product as a "must-have".


> I don't think copying drives innovation.

Would you deny innovation in Japan tech sector for the last 30 years?

It's just that it takes some time, around twenty years, to switch from copycats to innovative products.


Hm, I don't believe the copycats actually succeeded here. I bet if they didn't copy, innovation could have happened sooner. Copying just lets the company stay alive for longer since consumers can't differentiate easily, and said company can use the money to research new innovations.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: