Behringer: practices, ethics, morals and legitimacy.

Any music gear discussions that don't fit into one of the other forums.

Moderators: lisa, luketeaford, Kent, Joe.

Post Reply
User avatar
thetwlo
Super Deluxe Wiggler
Posts: 4764
Joined: Wed Apr 16, 2008 4:05 pm
Location: East Bay, CA US

Re: Behringer: practices, ethics, morals and legitimacy.

Post by thetwlo » Sat Feb 15, 2020 1:36 am

Behringer is a MASSIVE corporation, built on stealing Drawmer and Mackie and numerous other's designs, they don't care. They were caught, and convicted, no jail for Uli, he's a CEO. They don't care, they profited more times over the fine.
Perhaps Uli should address how that has, or hasn't changed?

Be Sandy?
Wiggling with Experience
Posts: 432
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2018 12:04 pm

Re: Behringer: practices, ethics, morals and legitimacy.

Post by Be Sandy? » Sat Feb 15, 2020 3:02 am

A reminder:

Behaviour expectations and rules in this thread are the same as the rest of the forum.


There's no reason for this or any other thread to devolve into personal attacks. If you feel like that's the correct response to what someone else has posted then it's quite likely time to step away from the computer and go and make some music or something. Many of the the intricacies of human communication are lost when we're not face to face, so please do consider what you write and how it could be potentially (mis)perceived by others.

22tape
Ultra Wiggler
Posts: 948
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 1:59 pm
Location: Yer mammy's dusty vibraphone

Re: Behringer: practices, ethics, morals and legitimacy.

Post by 22tape » Sat Feb 15, 2020 3:09 am

3hands wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 7:50 pm
Once again... lots of words, nothing to say.
First off, when I asked if Behringer donates to charitable causes, it was an honest question. Because I have no idea-- maybe they do donate? It's awesome if they do. People are so on edge that they read everything as a personal attack, and assume everyone has ill intent.

So let me try this again-- I think it'd be cool if all manufacturers, in every country, of every color, of every sex, of every religion, of every political stripe, of every age, no matter how rotten their pinky toe-nail, donated a portion of their profits to charity if they make money using other peoples' talent and hard work.

User avatar
3hands
Veteran Wiggler
Posts: 543
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2018 6:36 pm
Location: Ottawa Ontario

Re: Behringer: practices, ethics, morals and legitimacy.

Post by 3hands » Sat Feb 15, 2020 3:36 am

22tape wrote:
Sat Feb 15, 2020 3:09 am
3hands wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 7:50 pm
Once again... lots of words, nothing to say.
First off, when I asked if Behringer donates to charitable causes, it was an honest question. Because I have no idea-- maybe they do donate? It's awesome if they do. People are so on edge that they read everything as a personal attack, and assume everyone has ill intent.

So let me try this again-- I think it'd be cool if all manufacturers, in every country, of every color, of every sex, of every religion, of every political stripe, of every age, no matter how rotten their pinky toe-nail, donated a portion of their profits to charity if they make money using other peoples' talent and hard work.

And I whole heartedly agree with you. 100 percent. However that’s not the nature of competitive corporations. Does it suck? Yes. Can we as a buying community in a democratic system do much about it? Perhaps, but people aren’t interested in that aspect. I will say that if this is something that you’re interested in, when you buy a piece of gear from any corporation, why not make a donation to a charity of your choice in lieu of that company.

And I’m definitely not on edge about someone’s opinion on the Internet. But less on the attack, and more on the information is what makes this place so good, so more of that please!

:)

Cheers
Gum is fun, but not on a cat.

My minds an art gallery.

nthall
Learning to Wiggle
Posts: 19
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2020 8:25 pm

Re: Behringer: practices, ethics, morals and legitimacy.

Post by nthall » Sat Feb 15, 2020 4:05 pm

It's almost impossible to get into electronics manufacturing without commiting patent fraud. Intentional or not, someone else owns at least one piece of your idea. Your only options are very high end boutique that won't sell enough units to put you on the radar, or mass produce it, sell it cheap, and have cash flow to fight the lawsuits.

Samsung and Apple's legal battles are a perfect example.

Using pre-established might to wipe out competition isn't any better than any other ethical choices a company makes to survive. Except the high end boutique guys that limit production, so they can sell their massively overpriced products to people that will pay anything. No exploitation there.

KSS
Ultra Wiggler
Posts: 866
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 7:28 am

Re: Behringer: practices, ethics, morals and legitimacy.

Post by KSS » Sat Feb 15, 2020 11:11 pm

22tape wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 6:58 pm
Does Behringer donate to charitable causes recommended by, and on behalf of, the original designers?
There's a heading in the gearslutz forum page near the bottom which says they're donating 1000 synths. Probably doesn't fit the whole of your requirements, but neither did early Apple's going into schools support the originators of the personal computer circuits used as stepping stones by Woz in buidling his machine.

KSS
Ultra Wiggler
Posts: 866
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 7:28 am

Re: Behringer: practices, ethics, morals and legitimacy.

Post by KSS » Sat Feb 15, 2020 11:21 pm

Sinamsis wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 9:32 pm
Now when Blue Lantern starting utilizing the MI designs, that was controversial and perhaps a more related, but still different, comparison.
There is nothing unjustifiable in BL cloning MI. Unless one uses MI names, all else use is fair, according to multiple replies by Emilie Gillet on the subject.

What BL did gain notoriety for was the unsanctioned cloning of Ian Fritz circuits. That was years before MI existed. And was eventually amicably settled between BL and Fritz. As reported by Fritz.

KSS
Ultra Wiggler
Posts: 866
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 7:28 am

Re: Behringer: practices, ethics, morals and legitimacy.

Post by KSS » Sat Feb 15, 2020 11:30 pm

synthetek wrote:
Sat Feb 15, 2020 1:20 am
gringostar wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 2:02 pm
Korg re-issuing the ARP was also fine seeing how they own the rights to ARP and why Korg's 2600 clone is also fine.
Except that they dont actually own ARP
Correct. They only "own" the treble clef ARP logo, originally designed by David Friend's wife. They *do* have the goodwill of Mr. Friend -much played up during the K-ODY re-issues-, and have added a few other ARP OG with the K2600 reinvention.

This is nowhere the same as owning anything ARP beyond the clef logo. None of these people have *any* legal claim on ARP IP, and many might counter that they don't deserve any ethical credit at all, considering the poor choices made in the final years of ARP's existence.

KSS
Ultra Wiggler
Posts: 866
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 7:28 am

Re: Behringer: practices, ethics, morals and legitimacy.

Post by KSS » Sun Feb 16, 2020 12:13 am

nthall wrote:
Sat Feb 15, 2020 4:05 pm
It's almost impossible to get into electronics manufacturing without commiting patent fraud. Intentional or not, someone else owns at least one piece of your idea.
Sorry, but this is not even close to true. Once can easily get into electronics mfg. in general, and synth mfg specifically without undue concern for violating patents. Trademarks are another issue, but these are more easily accomodated. You're not alone in the belief that patents have a stranglehold that is largely ignored in synths. But it's not true.
Just like it's not true that moog sued ARP, or that many synth patents are even still in effect. Moog did receive one -or more?- patent related to their moogONE synth. And that would still be in effect. Outside of that, there is ittle patent protection -if any- still remaining from vintage designs. Patents by design expire after a limited number of years. 20 years in the USA, though different countries may have variations, and different cultures *definitely* have lower or higher tolerance to IP plagiarizing.

Trade dress still matters, but needs to be provably related to confusing a typical customer. So a Crave can be essentially an M32 in new clothes, and be fine. Meanwhile it's not a bad idea for Behringer to swap the colors of the rocker switches on an update of the minimoog, even though the new form factor is massively different from the original. Not for legal reasons, because whoever holds the copyright or trade dress -not patent!- on the minimoog panel look and feel would be hard to pin down. The present company moog music, inc. is not the same entity who made the originals. Their legal rights are *far* less than those granted them by the consumers and in the synth marketplace. And this is true for nearly every vintage synth brand still in existence.

There's a very large difference between what is legal, what is ethical, and what is socially acceptable. These three separate items are all too often confused, conjoined and inappropriately 'prosecuted' or defended. Synth forums are filled with posts which do not recognize this fact.

What is most relevent in the thread topic is that last word -"legitimacy". Because the legality of most issues raised in relation to synth mfg. is often far off base. The "practices, ethics and morals" questions will be endlessly debatable and will by nature be hard to resolve since this forum -and most others involved in synth discussions- is a worldwide multi-cultural platform.

Legal legitimacy is easy to discover, as can be seen in the fact that Korg's only legal connection with ARP is the treble clef logo. But they've picked up some social legitimiacy by befriending some ARP OG individuals and counting on the misperceptions of the community to extend this social legitimacy into the extended falsehoods we see posted over and over about their ownership of ARP.

Social legitimacy is what rules in our modern world. Try not to confuse that with legal, ethical, and morality. It may or may not have any relationship to those.
Samsung and Apple's legal battles are a perfect example.
I would say they are very poor examples as they exist in a field where current patents are numerous, and dollars to both innovate and fight are present. Their smallest battles dwarf synth mfgs. largest battles. Apples and oranges.
Using pre-established might to wipe out competition isn't any better than any other ethical choices a company makes to survive. Except the high end boutique guys that limit production, so they can sell their massively overpriced products to people that will pay anything. No exploitation there.
Your agenda here is likely misplaced. The idea that boutique guys are intentionally limiting production to maintain high prices or to otherwise exploit the consumers is overstated at best. And shows little understanding of actual necessary business practices. I won't try to change your mind, as I'm sure you will still believe, even after having been presented hard truths contrary to your position. And i won't fault you personally for this either, as cognitive bias affects us all.

Besides, your very last point *is* accurate. There's no exploitation there. Regardless of how many agree that some synth thing is artificially priced too high. Totally subjective, and often misinforned stance.

User avatar
synthetek
Wiggling with Experience
Posts: 438
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2015 3:32 am
Location: Orange County, California
Contact:

Re: Behringer: practices, ethics, morals and legitimacy.

Post by synthetek » Sun Feb 16, 2020 12:42 am

KSS wrote:
Sat Feb 15, 2020 11:30 pm
They *do* have the goodwill of Mr. Friend -much played up during the K-ODY re-issues-,
Yes, very played up, lol In an interview with David Friend it sounds like his involment wasn't much more than a conversation where he made a few suggestions. When they sent him a completed Odyssey he was surprised that it had midi and other stuff so his involvement in the development could not have been too much if he did not know any of that. But it was enough that they could throw his name out there and make everyone feel better about buying the Korg clone over others.

User avatar
Sinamsis
Super Deluxe Wiggler
Posts: 4127
Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2014 9:36 am
Location: Richmond, VA

Re: Behringer: practices, ethics, morals and legitimacy.

Post by Sinamsis » Sun Feb 16, 2020 8:56 am

KSS wrote:
Sat Feb 15, 2020 11:21 pm
Sinamsis wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 9:32 pm
Now when Blue Lantern starting utilizing the MI designs, that was controversial and perhaps a more related, but still different, comparison.
There is nothing unjustifiable in BL cloning MI. Unless one uses MI names, all else use is fair, according to multiple replies by Emilie Gillet on the subject.

What BL did gain notoriety for was the unsanctioned cloning of Ian Fritz circuits. That was years before MI existed. And was eventually amicably settled between BL and Fritz. As reported by Fritz.

IIRC the initial Braids clone did not give Olivier credit. I might be mistaken. Regardless of what actually happened there certainly was controversy. There was a dedicated thread on the topic.

User avatar
Red Electric Rainbow
Super Deluxe Wiggler
Posts: 1382
Joined: Tue Sep 21, 2010 7:48 am
Location: Chicago

Re: Behringer: practices, ethics, morals and legitimacy.

Post by Red Electric Rainbow » Wed Feb 19, 2020 11:16 am

9B8883D8-539F-417A-8155-A959295D227D.png
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
TOO FAR GONE

User avatar
patched
Common Wiggler
Posts: 57
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2019 12:42 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: Behringer: practices, ethics, morals and legitimacy.

Post by patched » Wed Feb 19, 2020 1:48 pm

Red Electric Rainbow wrote:
Wed Feb 19, 2020 11:16 am
...
Damn that's a corporate statement if I've ever seen one

User avatar
Red Electric Rainbow
Super Deluxe Wiggler
Posts: 1382
Joined: Tue Sep 21, 2010 7:48 am
Location: Chicago

Re: Behringer: practices, ethics, morals and legitimacy.

Post by Red Electric Rainbow » Wed Feb 19, 2020 3:53 pm

patched wrote:
Wed Feb 19, 2020 1:48 pm
Red Electric Rainbow wrote:
Wed Feb 19, 2020 11:16 am
...
Damn that's a corporate statement if I've ever seen one
:tu:
TOO FAR GONE

User avatar
Dr. Sketch-n-Etch
Super Deluxe Wiggler
Posts: 7592
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 1:46 pm
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada

Re: Behringer: practices, ethics, morals and legitimacy.

Post by Dr. Sketch-n-Etch » Wed Feb 19, 2020 6:01 pm

KSS wrote:
Sat Feb 15, 2020 11:30 pm
None of these people have *any* legal claim on ARP IP, and many might counter that they don't deserve any ethical credit at all, considering the poor choices made in the final years of ARP's existence.
There is no ARP IP. ARP has been out of business longer than IP even exists. Patents are in force for 20 years from the date of filing (ARP went out of business in 1981). The date of filing can precede the date of patent allowance by several years (I hold one or two patents which took more than five years to get allowed after filing). Once a patent has expired, it's fair game. That's the whole point of the patent concept -- it gives the inventor a LIMITED time to exploit the idea for their sole benefit.

All old Moog, ARP, KORG, Buchla -- it's all fair game, and there is absolutely nothing unethical or illegal in cloning it, selling it, or profiting from it.
For every bullshit job, you need a bullshit education -- Brian Eno

User avatar
Red Electric Rainbow
Super Deluxe Wiggler
Posts: 1382
Joined: Tue Sep 21, 2010 7:48 am
Location: Chicago

Re: Behringer: practices, ethics, morals and legitimacy.

Post by Red Electric Rainbow » Wed Feb 19, 2020 6:12 pm

Dr. Sketch-n-Etch wrote:
Wed Feb 19, 2020 6:01 pm
There is no ARP IP. ARP has been out of business longer than IP even exists. Patents are in force for 20 years from the date of filing (ARP went out of business in 1981). The date of filing can precede the date of patent allowance by several years (I hold one or two patents which took more than five years to get allowed after filing). Once a patent has expired, it's fair game. That's the whole point of the patent concept -- it gives the inventor a LIMITED time to exploit the idea for their sole benefit.

All old Moog, ARP, KORG, Buchla -- it's all fair game, and there is absolutely nothing unethical or illegal in cloning it, selling it, or profiting from it.
:tu: :tu: :tu:
TOO FAR GONE

User avatar
brokensolderingiron
Common Wiggler
Posts: 99
Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2014 6:52 pm

Re: Behringer: practices, ethics, morals and legitimacy.

Post by brokensolderingiron » Wed Feb 19, 2020 6:14 pm

patched wrote:
Wed Feb 19, 2020 1:48 pm
Red Electric Rainbow wrote:
Wed Feb 19, 2020 11:16 am
...
Damn that's a corporate statement if I've ever seen one
No, thats just the standard 101 management (page 86) "run of the mill blabber" business Inc folks run now and then for
whatever they imagine would fool the customer plebs, sometimes it works, "you" for instance, sometimes it dont.

KSS
Ultra Wiggler
Posts: 866
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 7:28 am

Re: Behringer: practices, ethics, morals and legitimacy.

Post by KSS » Wed Feb 19, 2020 8:39 pm

While I completely agree with you about patents, they are *not* the only form of IP. There are also copyright, trade secrets and trade dress. The latter two also do not factor for ARP, as there is no "ARP" to hurt with trade dress, and AFAIK no unknown ARP trade secrets.

The issue of copyright is potentially more muddy. This extends for 75 years past the death of the IP holder. In or around 1975, the requirement to directly lay claim and 'mark' copyright was replaced with automatic copyright assertion by mere creation and publication. This means ARP -and other company's- photos, manuals, circuit board layouts and ads *may* still belong to someone and remain active and enforceable IP.

It's not my intent to appear to disagree with your general assertion that nearly everything from the vintage years -and especially that of currently non-existent or re-booted companies- is fair game. That is true.

But it would be equally unfair -and inaccurate- to presume that everything is fair game. It is not. Perhaps that's why you left Roland off your summary list..

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Sketch-n-Etch wrote:
Wed Feb 19, 2020 6:01 pm
KSS wrote:
Sat Feb 15, 2020 11:30 pm
None of these people have *any* legal claim on ARP IP, and many might counter that they don't deserve any ethical credit at all, considering the poor choices made in the final years of ARP's existence.
There is no ARP IP. ARP has been out of business longer than IP even exists. Patents are in force for 20 years from the date of filing (ARP went out of business in 1981). The date of filing can precede the date of patent allowance by several years (I hold one or two patents which took more than five years to get allowed after filing). Once a patent has expired, it's fair game. That's the whole point of the patent concept -- it gives the inventor a LIMITED time to exploit the idea for their sole benefit.

All old Moog, ARP, KORG, Buchla -- it's all fair game, and there is absolutely nothing unethical or illegal in cloning it, selling it, or profiting from it.

User avatar
JayEm
Wiggling with Experience
Posts: 290
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2010 10:28 pm
Location: London, ON

Re: Behringer: practices, ethics, morals and legitimacy.

Post by JayEm » Wed Feb 19, 2020 9:11 pm

KSS wrote:
Wed Feb 19, 2020 8:39 pm

But it would be equally unfair -and inaccurate- to presume that everything is fair game. It is not. Perhaps that's why you left Roland off your summary list..





Roland has taken steps in the last few decades to protect their IP where it could. While they never showed interest in rereleasing old gear, they did send C&D orders against numerous software companies who stepped on their toes visually speaking.
But their were several 303 "clones" before the X0XBox and those companies got along fine, probably because the actual guts of the machines were either different enough on the inside or the circuits themselves were never unique enough to patent.
BandCamp Instagram
"peoples moist elbow cruxes, sodden with phlegm" - Joe.

OIP
Common Wiggler
Posts: 154
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2015 9:43 pm

Re: Behringer: practices, ethics, morals and legitimacy.

Post by OIP » Thu Feb 20, 2020 12:47 am

"as we relentlessly continue to push the envelope" yeah right.

how about pushing the design envelope even just a tiny little bit rather than using the manufacturing resources of a massive company to make copies from existing schematics less impressive than committed lone DIYers have built in their garages.

maybe there will be a behringer synth worth cloning some day?

User avatar
synthetek
Wiggling with Experience
Posts: 438
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2015 3:32 am
Location: Orange County, California
Contact:

Re: Behringer: practices, ethics, morals and legitimacy.

Post by synthetek » Thu Feb 20, 2020 2:12 am

JayEm wrote:
Wed Feb 19, 2020 9:11 pm
Roland has taken steps in the last few decades to protect their IP where it could. While they never showed interest in rereleasing old gear, they did send C&D orders against numerous software companies who stepped on their toes visually speaking.
But their were several 303 "clones" before the X0XBox and those companies got along fine, probably because the actual guts of the machines were either different enough on the inside or the circuits themselves were never unique enough to patent.
Roland doesn't seem to care as much about the circuits or whats inside the clones, they seem more worried about the image. Roland is still making machines that look like the 303 , 808, etc.. and they make shirts with the classic synths and use the likeness in the Roland cloud instruments.

User avatar
StillNotWorking
Wiggling with Experience
Posts: 469
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 3:29 pm
Contact:

Re: Behringer: practices, ethics, morals and legitimacy.

Post by StillNotWorking » Thu Feb 20, 2020 4:16 am

Roland also protected they're sampled sound library whenever needed. Which is why B should have problem taking advantages of popular product names like Roland JD-990 or JD-800.

Doesn't the 909 everyone is waiting for use a couple of samples from Paiste 602 cymbals? Wonder if those will be remakes or copies?

everydaycurry
Learning to Wiggle
Posts: 49
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2019 4:36 pm
Location: Houston

Re: Behringer: practices, ethics, morals and legitimacy.

Post by everydaycurry » Thu Feb 20, 2020 4:47 am

OIP wrote:
Thu Feb 20, 2020 12:47 am
"as we relentlessly continue to push the envelope" yeah right.

how about pushing the design envelope even just a tiny little bit rather than using the manufacturing resources of a massive company to make copies from existing schematics less impressive than committed lone DIYers have built in their garages.
jackoffmotion.gif to the corporatespeak of 'pushing the envelope' but in terms of a capitalist enterprise it's very simple: in the mass market people want the familiar.

People actually demanding envelope-pushing in instrument design are a niche audience. It's not just nostalgia at work, either - the more basic interfaces of older gear can be more pleasant to work with and oftentimes designers of the past got things ergonomically right to an extent they don't need improvement.

User avatar
Red Electric Rainbow
Super Deluxe Wiggler
Posts: 1382
Joined: Tue Sep 21, 2010 7:48 am
Location: Chicago

Re: Behringer: practices, ethics, morals and legitimacy.

Post by Red Electric Rainbow » Fri Feb 21, 2020 7:36 am

StillNotWorking wrote:
Thu Feb 20, 2020 4:16 am
Roland also protected they're sampled sound library whenever needed. Which is why B should have problem taking advantages of popular product names like Roland JD-990 or JD-800.

Doesn't the 909 everyone is waiting for use a couple of samples from Paiste 602 cymbals? Wonder if those will be remakes or copies?
not sure how patents and IP work at all but the JD-800/990 are digital synths that rely heavily on the programming code (i think). im not sure where that code or those algorithms fall from a legal standpoint. looking under the hood of analog synth with circuitry might be more clear cut to clone then an OS?

Roland, if your reading this please reissue the Roland JD-800/990 into a full sized single package without any red-glue issues. Please add a sequencer. While your at it, a JP-8000/8080 reissue would be welcomed.
TOO FAR GONE

User avatar
coolshirtdotjpg
Super Deluxe Wiggler
Posts: 1286
Joined: Wed May 06, 2015 4:13 pm
Location: Santa Cruz, California

Re: Behringer: practices, ethics, morals and legitimacy.

Post by coolshirtdotjpg » Fri Feb 21, 2020 1:07 pm

Sinamsis wrote:
Sun Feb 16, 2020 8:56 am
KSS wrote:
Sat Feb 15, 2020 11:21 pm
Sinamsis wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 9:32 pm
Now when Blue Lantern starting utilizing the MI designs, that was controversial and perhaps a more related, but still different, comparison.
There is nothing unjustifiable in BL cloning MI. Unless one uses MI names, all else use is fair, according to multiple replies by Emilie Gillet on the subject.

What BL did gain notoriety for was the unsanctioned cloning of Ian Fritz circuits. That was years before MI existed. And was eventually amicably settled between BL and Fritz. As reported by Fritz.

IIRC the initial Braids clone did not give Olivier credit. I might be mistaken. Regardless of what actually happened there certainly was controversy. There was a dedicated thread on the topic.
Let's not dead-name Emilie, it was because they miss-spelt her name, but honestly it doesn't matter at this point since that is not the name she is going by. It was just sloppy and careless by BL (probably shouldn't put someone's name on a design they had no involvement with, and you should definitely check the spelling before putting it on the front panel) and Emilie said as much, but as in all cases basically said she didn't care.
New video for my track
Opening The Portal

Post Reply

Return to “General Gear”