Copying Is Often Efficient And Smart
from the it's-not-so-bad dept
A couple months ago, we mentioned the book Copycats, which highlights how copying others is often a good overall business strategy, not just for companies, but for innovation as a whole (and, from that, society at large). I've since gotten a copy of the book, though haven't had a chance to read it (getting to it... eventually...). But it's interesting to see others picking up on the same idea, outside of the book (or did they just copy it?). Peter Friedman points us to a Business Week column by Scott Berkun, who has done lots of writing on this topic, highlighting how wasteful it is to have everyone trying to "reinvent" stuff that's already been invented (often reinventing it in a "worse" way). His argument, like the one in the Copycats book, is that we need to get over this stigma that copying is somehow "bad."Right now, in meetings at corporations around the world, the wise are suffering. They are trapped in rooms where debate rages over how to solve a problem. The rub is that the problem has already been solved, just not by someone in the room--and solutions from outside are ignored. This is the disease known as "NIH," or "Not Invented Here" syndrome, and it's alive and well in 2010. Despite our many technological advancements in communication, none have eliminated this perennial waste of time. Why is this problem so hard to shake? Will we always be confronted with people who insist on reinventing wheels?It's good to see more people discussing this basic topic, as the cultural stigma against building off of what others have done is really quite disturbing, and underlies many of the arguments in favor of bad copyright and patent laws. Getting people to realize that building on the works of others has produced wonderful things, while also being much more efficient, is a key to rethinking how we view concepts like "intellectual property."
Filed Under: copying, efficiency, not invented here
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
And once the disease is inside you, it is very hard to break away from that kind of thinking.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Look at the economic success of the far east
Having said that I have to admit that I'm one of those people who much prefers to re-invent stuff rather than copy - but that isn't because I think there is something wrong with copying - its because I enjoy the re-invention process.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Copying Is Often Efficient And Smart
Creations of Artists : No -- unless you are a Good Faith-ed Artist.
-----------------------
MIKE : "and underlies many of the arguments in favor of bad copyright and patent laws."
Me: Patents : yes I agree , the law needs fixing.
Copyright -- better laws to protects Artists and writers are coming. (Face it.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Copying Is Often Efficient And Smart
It always gets me a good laugh.
You're either insane, stupid, or paid to be ignorant. No matter which one, it's very amusing to us sane intelligent people.
Kudos!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Copying Is Often Efficient And Smart
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Copying Is Often Efficient And Smart
Oh, my ... I did not realize that was a prerequisite to posting.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Copying Is Often Efficient And Smart
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Copying Is Often Efficient And Smart
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Copying Is Often Efficient And Smart
Case in point: " ,, "
F-; See me after class.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Copying Is Often Efficient And Smart
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Copying Is Often Efficient And Smart
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Copying Is Often Efficient And Smart
I have dyslexia , a serious and well established DISABILITY.
When i write formal , i hire a proof reader ,, this is not formal.
Bug off, Karl.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Copying Is Often Efficient And Smart
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Copying Is Often Efficient And Smart
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Kari and not Karl.
dyslexia ,is a disability that affects reading.
"Kari and not Karl." on a computer screen ,
through bi-focals ,,,, at 2 foot distance.-----
------------------
-----------
--------
,,,,give me a brake,
the foul language was unneeded--- and grossly offensive , in this instance. I clearly was talking about dyslexia for me and you write :
"You should really learn how to READ. It's Kari and not Karl. Fucking moron."
Disgusting.
Absolutely & Grossly Disgusting.
AND it shows more about your insensitivity,,
to a person w/ a disability than it does about whether ,
I am a "f-ing M".
-----------
-----------
To Mike :
Too much on my spelling and typing.
EVEN after specifically posting it in the thread in question -- like this one.
Dyslexia is an "established disability",,
and just as with "racism",, any form of discrimination , or harassment thereof , is "wrong", "immoral" & even "illegal".
Most every posting board I have ever participated in , would lock out "any comment" disparaging "ANY issue" , of "race" , "religion" , "sexual orientation" or "disability" .
I see you have a new rating system.
I hope it will be used in instances such as these to lock out those commentators who "violate social norms" -- that are "legally enforceable" if "repeated without restraint".
You are the webmaster Mike.
I hold you responsible for the comments here.
This ====
"You should really learn how to READ. It's Kari and not Karl. Fucking moron."
to someone who just wrote :
"been through this 20 X already , I have dyslexia , a serious and well established DISABILITY. When i write formal , i hire a proof reader ,, this is not formal. Bug off,"
=== IS out of bounds , even for TechDirt.
IF Happens again,, ..................
Please do not try me.
=============================end........==========
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Kari and not Karl.
So, by your statement, if I were to send you a letter filled with hate speech, you'd hold the post office accountable for delivering the nasty letter? Good luck with that one.
You are either dense, or incredibly delusional, or a very good actor trying to pass off as a copyright nitwit.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Kari and not Karl.
ME :web masters are equally responsible in this situation , as i understand the law, ---- and I said IF it happens again.
Using the U.S. Mail for and "illegal" purpose is mail fraud et al.
Because the letter is private and unopened the Post office is clearly not responsible.
Here it is a public comment , on a public posting board.
------------------------
You :You are either dense, or incredibly delusional, or a very good actor trying to pass off as a copyright nitwit.
Me : I am none of the above. AT all .
Just as an "employer" would be responsible for an "employee" who "repeatably harassed" "another employee",
so too , IF it happens again here with my dyslexic , being subject to abuse, yes , Mike , would share responsibly.
=====================
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Kari and not Karl.
You: "Here it is a public comment , on a public posting board."
Yes, but the comments were between 2 individuals.
I think that the safe harbor provisions apply here. Mike has no influence over the comment-section.
Or would you say that Mike is responsible for your comments too? In that case, who owns the copyright over your posts? You? Or Mike?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Kari and not Karl.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Kari and not Karl.
It is the best defense of civil rights from abuse .
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Kari and not Karl.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Kari and not Karl.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Kari and not Karl.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Kari and not Karl.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Kari and not Karl.
IF Happens again,, ..................
Please do not try me.
TP, just a day ago, you said "fuck you" directly to me after I posted a system to help musicians such as yourself. And now you're threatening to blame me for a similar comment made to you?
And, no, webmasters are not responsible for the comments on the site. I'd never take responsibility for the drivel you write.
But if you want to be "tried," go ahead.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Kari and not Karl.
1]the comment that ticked me off -- was aimed at my disability -- dyslexia. Pure harassment under "the Americans with Disabilities Act"
2] my "F.U." to you Mike , was to your ridiculous opinions.-- and is protected speech.
3] HUUUUGE difference --legally
4] if you do not see that -- see you in court , and the Judge will explain it to you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Kari and not Karl.
I believe you are misreading the ADA, but if you would like to test that in court, go for it.
Either way, your dispute would be with the commenter, not with us. If you would like a long list of case law on this matter, my lawyer will be happy to deliver it to you, at your expense.
2] my "F.U." to you Mike , was to your ridiculous opinions.-- and is protected speech.
Both were responses to opinions and both were protected speech.
3] HUUUUGE difference --legally
Actually, no, it's not. I would suggest that there are lots of ways to get a legal education. Bringing a lawsuit based on a faulty understanding of the laws is not an efficient one.
4] if you do not see that -- see you in court , and the Judge will explain it to you.
Wait, now you're threatening to sue me?
Please look up Section 230 of the CDA, as well as California's anti-SLAPP laws. Both would be relevant, and would save you a lot of trouble (and wasted money). Also, make sure your attorney understands rule 11 sanctions. Because all three of those things will come into play.
This is the last time I will address this here and I hope it is the last time you address it as well. If you continue to threaten to sue us without basis, please be aware that there are legal responses we may take.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not Invented Here syndrome
The problems were predictable: Deadlines were consistently missed, all 14 contracted projects were late, the attrition rate grew exponentially, and, of course, bugs, bugs, bugs. The standalone, 100% custom system took one hour to boot, which made testing a nightmare for developers.
Eventually the product was ported to a major vendor version of UNIX.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
First, a country starts off as being poor
Then, it proceeds to beginning to manufacture some products for other countries
Afterward, it begins copying other countries' products to make a breach
After copying, it proceeds to improving the product to make it its own after which, true development begins.
I think it is the same for a company :
It starts off small, produces for others, then copy a product, and improve it in its own way therefore increasing concurrence, and eventually if it manages, to be its own big company.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Copyright vs Science
The only way to succeed in science is to build up on the achievements of the predecessors.
If there were copyright laws enforced in the science then we would still be running around in Stone Age.
The scientists care about the origins of the breakthrough knowledge but they encourage its usage.
The modern society should probably rearm itself with the scientific approach to copyright.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Copyright vs Science
And i guess patents was totally better for India when they wanted to make drugs to fight AIDS for themselves, instead of buying from the USA.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Copyright vs Science
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Copyright vs Science
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Which is why
ARE FUCKING RETARDS
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's not just "copy/paste"
Typically, whomever did all the research into a complex area has a HUGE advantage over someone else who tries to "copy" them. Intel could make a general patent to cover a certain process, but I bet another company implementing it could take years and even then it wouldn't be as good as Intel because Intel would have all the knowledge about the little tweaks to make it work smoothly.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]