US Messenger Bag Company Discovers Copycats In Asia... Says We'll Keep Innovating And They'll Have To Keep Up
from the nice-response dept
We've pointed out in the past that too many companies totally overreact to copycat products hitting the market. If you're really an innovator, you keep innovating, and copycat companies won't be able to keep up. Or, worst case, if they leapfrog you, you build on their designs as well. However, many companies, still freak out and call the lawyers (or politicians!) and say "this is wrong!" So it's nice to see a company react smartly. Reader Wes sends over this blog post from the company Tom Bihn, which makes messenger bags, luggage and such things -- who recently discovered an Asian company blatantly copying one of their designs. So how did they respond? By noting that imitation is the highest form of flattery, and that they're just going to focus on innovating, so any copycats will just have to keep up:Looks like someone liked our authentic Ristretto for iPad so much that they decided to copy it. This email was forwarded to us by a customer in Norway. Can any of you translate it for us? Our best guess is that this product is made in somewhere in Asia (not Norway) though we don't know for certain. Are we mad? Not really. We're too busy designing the next generation of laptop bags -- the copycats will just have to keep up with us.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: copying, innovation
Companies: tom bihn
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Well Done!!
10 points and much kudos. I now know:
1. That your bag exist because I've seen it on Tech Dirt.
2. There are people out there copying it so it must be a quality bag. (no one's ever sold a copy Zen Xui watch but they do sell copy Rolexes)
3. That I should be careful when purchasing this bag because there are copies out there! (I'm now forced to remember the brand name not just the style/look).
4. Your product will be discussed more. (Is that a real rolex?)
5. People will be drawn to sites about your bags. ('How to spot a fake Rolex' 1,620,000 results on Google).
Great attitude and good luck!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Guess how much more excited I am....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
All good and well
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: All good and well
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: All good and well
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: All good and well
Good point, which emphasizes my comment about digital innovation, or other areas where innvation requires few resources. Open source projects are a fine example of people doing good for its own sake. But it works for open source only because you can get a distributed swarm of people to collaborate farily easily. Again, it all comes down to the effort and risk needed for a result.
I'm an ME. Once I donated time to an EE heading a new product development team. In his prior experience any incremental failures on the path to success could be fixed with a new board layout, new code, etc. He quickly learned that mistakes in the high tech hardware world can mean months of delay and many $1000s of scrap. He summed up this new perspective in his comment, "Y'know, you MEs have the worst editor ever...." Some innovations are easier than others.
What do you want your innovation to achieve, what will it take to make it happen, and will you be able to give a proper return to your investors before some Asian sweatshop with no creative talent rips it off? In some fields of endeavor, innovation will only happen if those questions have a favorable answer.
Perhaps the goal is to change how those 'antiquated' fields of endeavor operate? If so, how?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: All good and well
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Innovation is hard. Immitation is easy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Innovation is hard. Immitation is easy.
It is sad you no longer have the desire, maybe you should just retire.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Innovation is hard. Immitation is easy.
Actually, as a digital artist specializing in Graphic Design, not only can my designs be copied, they also can be copied infinitly, cheaply, and rapidly.
My selling points? Creativity and Execution. And while other may "steal" my ideas, they will never be able to steal how I execute the idea.
And, y'know, I can always come up with more. I have too many ideas as it is.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: "creating a market niche"????
No offense sir, but, you need to study some history. The whole concept that the creator of an idea is the only one who should/will profit from it is relatively new in the larger stream of history.
The fact is that there is a long tradition of intellectual property "piracy" in this country. In the colonial age it was a common practice to reprint books written in Europe because of the taxes on books imported into the colonies. They would get one such book and fire up the printing presses. One such IP "pirate" was Benjamin Franklin. (Paul Revere was a smuggler, but, therein lies another tale)And indeed it is ancient. Archimedes worried about rival mathematicians "stealing" his innovations so much he laid traps for them in his published works. (Don't think he caught any flies, but, I don't know for sure)
Point being that, yes, innovation is difficult, and yes there is piracy of said innovation, but, that hasn't stopped innovation. There has always been a conflict between "pirates" and "innovators." And there probably always will be. It's simply a fact of human existance.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: "creating a market niche"????
I have worked for two companies who didn't just create market niches but entire markets - i.e. it was not possible to get anything like what they made until they made it. That's innovation. In the world of high tech products innovation doesn't happen unless it's a profitable venture. The whole "ideas should be free" concept may carry some weight in the digital world, but be very careful about applying that approach to expensive hardware.
I am all for working for the benefit of all mankind, but I have to make a living too. I do understand there will always be tension between pirates and innovators. Just understand that there is a balance to be struck, and that balance changes with the amount of resources needed and risk involved for the innovation in question.
So far no one has countered my primary point: If you remove the incentive for people to innovate, you get less innovation. Of course innovation doesn't stop entirely. But if immitators are completely unrestrained we'll never know what could have been. Immitation has a cost. We just don't know what it is.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: "creating a market niche"????
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: "creating a market niche"????
I'm sure the tobacco companies worked very hard developing the market for nicorete.
See - that was not difficult, now was it?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Innovation is hard. Immitation is easy.
And I always get a kick out of commenters who kick off with an insult.
Speaking as a product development engineer near the end of a long career (and, ironically, unemployed) I can tell you with certainty that innovation is very hard.
Did anyone say otherwise?
Immitation, on the other hand, reaps all the benefits of that hard work, money, countless hours, anxiety and many more devastating failures than you know, at no cost.
That's nice in theory. Thankfully, we've covered the many, many studies that show this is not true in reality for a variety of reasons. First, if the product really is complicated, it's not so easy to just copy. Second, even if it is easy to copy, the first mover advantage can be quite strong in keeping a market. Third, often "copying" only copies the superficial aspects of a product, rather than what really makes it cool or makes it work well. Fourth, the first to market often has a better understanding of what the market *really* wants and is in a much better position to stay ahead.
Yes, sometimes a copier will win -- but, that's competition. And, in the end, it's better for consumers.
As for the idea that lots of innovators don't even bother because they're worried about competitors, again, we pointed to some MIT research last year that found that to be a very rare occurrence. Most innovation occurs because someone is scratching their own itch for a need.
So, I understand the *theory* of what you're claiming, but thankfully, we have data that shows it's simply not true for the most part.
[ 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 ]
Re: Re: Re:
Because you can.
If you have a gift you use it and don't care a fig about others, you are satisfied with your own accomplishments.
Sounds to me like you are a just another coin operated person.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Perhaps. Or maybe you are yet another person who does not understand the struggle and risk of implementing innovation. Do it. Then you're qualified to talk about it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Seems to me like you're the one living in a cushy, patent protected life.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
It doesn't work that way and you know it, or do you?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Actually, in my experience it does work that way. Time and again. Frankly I'm a little disturbed at how I continue to go around this issue with all of you and neither side can see the other's point of view. Maybe it's because (speaking in broad strokes here) bloggers and digital guys routinely recycle others' ideas using little more than a keyboard. Whereas I have had to ensure no laws of nature are violated, create prototypes, test, make sure the product is safe, get capital outlays approved, etc. etc.
Maybe it has to do with our definition of innovation. Getting back to the original subject, I wonder if "innovation" in the case of US Messenger Bag is nothing more than a different look to the product, or maybe a new flap or pocket - basically a fashion change with a little function thrown in. In which case it requires no more than a stylist/marketing effort and a few material and machine programming changes to implement. If true, coming out with a new style frequently is no big deal.
When I speak of innovation I mean making possible that which was not possible before. Are we really saying there is no value in bringing something truly new to market? Do we really believe that companies with the resources to innovate don't fully evaluate the profitability of a venture before starting? That if they know profits will be lower without protection from immitators, all projects will still make it to consumers? Seriously?
This discussion has too much of a tone of mindless idealogical extremism. The needle on my BS detector is in the yellow zone. Everyone but me is talking in terms of broad principles. Who here actually makes a living by innovating? You know, nuts, bolts, dollars, cents, markets, ROI? Not just turning the crank on old ideas?
Small-scale charitable behavior is a beautiful thing. But where the numbers are big, the numbers will be favorable, or innovation won't happen. Ignorance is bliss. You can't miss innovations you never see.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
As an ME in training this seems absolutely backward. To "ensure no laws of nature are broken" makes you sound like a wizard rather than someone who uses his understanding OF the laws of nature to create something. You don't 'violate' laws of nature, you use conclusions based on their unavoidable existence to control how you approach a problem. The rest of the quote sounds exactly like normal work of an engineer, what's so special about that?
"I wonder if "innovation" in the case of US Messenger Bag is nothing more than a different look to the product, or maybe a new flap or pocket - basically a fashion change with a little function thrown in. In which case it requires no more than a stylist/marketing effort and a few material and machine programming changes to implement. If true, coming out with a new style frequently is no big deal."
That's only incremental innovation, it's nice sure, but it doesn't move the company forward. Initial designs of a bag will have to consider specific constraints: strength of the materials, how they are joined, size of the compartments, positioning of accessory compartments, length of strap, just to name a few obvious ones. If a design is good it will both have considered the important design variables as well as implemented them in a way which is powerful.
Then of course comes the "foreign company" who has "cheap labor" who can copy your designs. Ignoring the benefits some people talked about in other comments about brand devotion, it's possible that you would go out of business if you merely kept selling this design. Doing this however ignores your strenghts.
As the bag company you already went through the work of designing this great bag. Because of it's success you know what matters when making that bag, and you know how to address those problems in an efficient matter. The company copying you knows none of this. What you should do, and what this company does appear to be doing, is to use these criterion to expand their market. Ok, they made a good laptop bag, but what about other bags? Because of their success in the laptop bag market, they probably have the tools to be successful in the backpack market. That is innovation, because it takes their developmental advantage to consistently create a product that will be ahead of the game.
Take the example of Apple. I am not a fan of their products, but i recognize that the reason they are successful is that they have been able to consistently build (somewhat elitist) quality (this is the important part) products that are ahead of the competition, because of their developmental understanding of their last product.
I suppose rather than saying innovation simply starts with an itch, it would be more correct to say that innovation is led by itches, as a company sees the progressively wider expanse of how they can take advantage of their strengths in the market.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Loss of some sales won't make your venture profitless... it just might make it profit less than before. It is basically silly to suggest otherwise.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
The evidence suggests the opposite. PC computing took off after IBM chose not to use proprietary operating systems and microprocessors and IBM PC-compatible clones entered the market. There were plenty of innovators in that field.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Excellent company
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Class
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I have heard of Monster Cable and will never buy or recommend any of their products.
See how the way a company handles a problem and the way the internet works.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Highly, highly recommended products
And of course the example should not be lost on the fashion/clothing world generally. Have great brand values and it won't matter if you get copied.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re++
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
maybe, or..
However, I can't help but wonder, is their reaction like this ONLY because it's not happening in the US? Trying to chase after copycats in other countries (especially Asia) is kind of a lost cause, and they probably realized that.
If it was a company in the US doing the copying and they had this kind of response as opposed to sic'ing the lawyers.. I'd be much more impressed.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]