What do you think of "borrowing" other peoples designs?

Guess it really depends on what it is, but if a person does that, they shouldn't claim it as their own..Someone has done this on something that I've spent a few years r&ding/designing/perfecting, so I'm slightly upset about the situation.

If something isn't patented, or even if it is, unfortunately this sort stuff will still go on.

Shit happens..good ideas get recycled.

---

Build the car, race the car, crash the car, fix the car..Repeat



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/02/2007 04:56PM by B-.

That will happen. I'm sure if I tried, I could create a replica or technical drawing of the caliper carrier that TCE made for my rear brakes. The rotor and hat are off the shelf parts, with some minor modifications to the hat. It'd be fairly easy for me to replicate and possibly sell at a little lower cost than TCE. But I don't and I won't because it's not ethical. Just like I wouldn't give the kid a drawing of the tow hook kit JVAB sold me so he could make a set for himself.

You will sell things based upon your good business practices, ethical business practices, and good customer service. Fuck, there are entire companies that make their living off of replicating products from other manufacturers.

Speaking of which, here's what Mike Rose said about your suspension post-Cog, "The new suspension did very good actually. I was very happy with them...they were very smooth and predictable...felt very similar to the DMS 50's when I was codriving with Erik"

I'm sure you can look forward to more Colorado based Subaru suspension orders coming your way.

Think of any copying of your design of a product as being flattery. Meaning you thought of something better first.

So, what was it that was copied?

---

Grant Hughes

Funny you should ask Barrett.
Making ears is hardly a "design change" and funnily enough, until Nat stow bought one set of stuff for the VW you were putting together for him, you were never in the suspension manufacturing business, you were putting together Subarus for street and play and simply ordering suspension to whatever a persons budget could afford---till you got one set of my stuff.

I'll say quite frankly I think it sucks big horse cock that you decided you need to try and undercut me or whatever and move into a sector of the market where its already fairly saturated, rather than just doing what you were doing.

I mean I have to wonder where you get your ideas on damping and spring rates etc cause I didn't know you had made or supplied or built suspenssion before.

So while it may suck big giant cocks that you did it, you're right, its not a patented design, and really everybody's stuff since the 70s is more or less the same,
just kinda sucky that you decided to get greedy and copy the stuff---especially after all the phone calls hinting about all the customers you could be sending my way.

I guess what you're seeing is turn-about or karma is a bitch, eh?

---

John Vanlandingham
Sleezattle, WA, USA

Vive le Prole-le-ralliat

www.rallyrace.net/jvab
CALL +1 206 431-9696
Remember! Pacific Standard Time
is 3 hours behind Eastern Standard Time.

My 2 cents...

Copying is the norm, true innovation is rare.

Putting together 2 or more common things is not invention.

Pretty much NONE of what IS covered by patent/copyright/trademark/IP law SHOULD be protected by patent/copyright/trademark/IP law.

I pretty much agree with most of what the guys at www.techdirt.com have to say on the subject.

---

____________________________________________________________-

One. Class -- 2WD

www.quantumrallysport.com

http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#/pages/Quantum-Rally-Sport/281129179600?ref=nf

I have no idea what your "innovation" was but having had products I designed knocked off in China and imported for 1/3 the price the answer is innovate again. There is nothing to be gained from being pissed or whining on the internet about it. Yeah, it sucks...but you have to move on.


Tim

john vanlandingham Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Funny you should ask Barrett.
> Making ears is hardly a "design change" and
> funnily enough, until Nat stow bought one set of
> stuff for the VW you were putting together for
> him, you were never in the suspension
> manufacturing business, you were putting together
> Subarus for street and play and simply ordering
> suspension to whatever a persons budget could
> afford---till you got one set of my stuff.
>
> I'll say quite frankly I think it sucks big horse
> cock that you decided you need to try and undercut
> me or whatever and move into a sector of the
> market where its already fairly saturated, rather
> than just doing what you were doing.
>
> I mean I have to wonder where you get your ideas
> on damping and spring rates etc cause I didn't> know you had made or supplied or built suspenssion
> before.
>
> So while it may suck big giant cocks that you did
> it, you're right, its not a patented design, and
> really everybody's stuff since the 70s is more or
> less the same,
> just kinda sucky that you decided to get greedy
> and copy the stuff---especially after all the
> phone calls hinting about all the customers you
> could be sending my way.
>
> I guess what you're seeing is turn-about or karma
> is a bitch, eh?
>
>
>
> John Vanlandingham
> Sleezattle, WA, USA
>
> Vive le Prole-le-ralliat
>
> www.jvab.f4.ca


John,

First off, please keep in mind, that we build rally cars, not just street cars, and suspension is a key part of any build. That's where it all began. I think we are on the same page there?

Actually I had a set of similar coilover suspension on my car prior to the VW. Those were the ones that were improved upon, not yours..We were r&d ing on my car before we ever met. Bilstein helped with that portion. You wanted nothing to do with Subarus on any level when we did meet. That's the majority of the cars that we build, so why not build something that works for them? It was the VWs, Merkurs and Volvos that were your niche, and still are, for the most part. The majority of our builds are rally related, and fabbing, creating, and engineering are parts of that process. If we notice anything on the car that can be improved upon we try to come up with solid solutions that work on stage. Neither one of us will be the only one that builds rally cars/parts, has ideas for them, or comes up with a better idea. Some of these young bucks are pretty sharp. Not quite sure what you mean about undercutting you. Don't even know how much your struts go for..Greedy, right. Definately not getting rich. Ask those that know me well. I bust my ass to keep my clients happy and make ends meet.

I sent you customers..

Yes, the basic design of most of that style of suspension has pretty much stayed the same for many years with adaptations per application, etc. It's just using what works and building it to whatever spec a person wants (or your own). The only thing that the market is saturated with is either weak street coilover or $5k+ rally supension. Not quality bits. You used a different design on your bodies until recently, using recycled stock ears in stock locations.. The current rear ear on the "Sooper Bitchin JVAB 50s" for Subarus is pretty identical to mine. Using machined plate, gusseted, dropped, etc., ala your pics. Those are key to getting the struts to work ideally. Please show me another strut with the same design if possible. I've seen hundreds of aftermarket Subaru coilovers through the years, none with that style ear. Somehow within several months of "mutual" clients contact, yours is the same. That coincidence is unlikely without having gotten that idea _somewhere_. It was probably an old/current client of yours that forwarded a pic via email.

We both have clients all over the place that rally hard, we both build all kinds of stuff that works and finishes events. They can choose to spend their money wherever. Neither one of us is going anywhere within the community, so we should probably just deal with that fact and get on with it..Some of our clients will cross both our paths, others won't.. We both appreciate cost effectiveness and strong cars in rally builds.

The parts we build don't go on a clients's car until proven on stage first. They are not the guinea pigs for what they buy, it's tested and proven before they get it.

Take it with a grain of salt.
B-

---

Build the car, race the car, crash the car, fix the car..Repeat

Barret go re re-read, I'll put it bold italics where I said you were building things fro street and play----rally is play.



So am I to understand that this thread was in fact you imagining that I had "barrowed" your design??

Barrett, I make and have made stuff for anybody that comes to my door, with any car for 23 years now and had already made two Subie car sets before I think you opened your doors for business.

As for the ear design, there's only so many ways to do it in low volume runs, and as I got an order for 22 Legassy/GC8/'02 50mm units that quantity justified laser cutting a series of ears front and rear, and one fellows ordering a set, Dave Amor from Ontario brought with him on a visit here a set of RSSP things by to look at I figured have a look at what's good and what can we make using some of their dimensional solutions at our smaller scale. The cap to the ears was done first 2 1/2 years ago on a "chop out 4" run, this time it was 40 units.
The main thing he brought them for was for was the centerline of strut to center of mount hole dimensions, and the overall length dimesions so as to avoid a mounting fiasco like with the Legacy that couldn't be brought up for a test fit---you know which car I am referring.
These 50mm units are 210mm travel so getting them installed without problems was critical, and the DMS and RSSP were likewise longer travel and also utilise larger OD springs so that and THOSE do mount up and have spring clearance.

Having all 48 ex-GroupA inserts at the same length when the rear OAL is so much longer, and making all the tubes at the same length, the length has to come from somewhere, and dropping the ears down in the rear is the only way if we can't make the insert longer like everybody does, like the DMS units I had here.
It doesn't take very many minutes to figure out the drop thing when the other lengths are inflexibly set.
If you quote "spent a few years designing/perfecting" something that is perfectly obvious* with the other design limitations, and which I chopped out of cardboard in about 1- 1.5 ciggarettes time when Dave was here, then I think maybe you better turn up the heat on the seat where you do you designing, or start looking around an awful lot more at things beyond your current horisons.

And if I was right in assuming that this thread is about me "barrowing" what you think is YOUR idea, then you need to publicly apologize for the accusation to me and to who ever it was that you backhandedly accused of forwarding your photos.

As I said, karma sucks, eh?


* Well obvious if you've been modding suspension on things since 1973 maybe...

---

John Vanlandingham
Sleezattle, WA, USA

Vive le Prole-le-ralliat

www.rallyrace.net/jvab
CALL +1 206 431-9696
Remember! Pacific Standard Time
is 3 hours behind Eastern Standard Time.

B- Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The parts we build don't go on a clients's car
> until proven on stage first. They are not the
> guinea pigs for what they buy, it's tested and
> proven before they get it.

That there is one fucked up philosophy if I've ever read one. Your customers are your best r&d department. Especially considering that you can get them to send you money now as a deposit, spend that money now on different projects now, then in a few years, try to get more money for a future project to fund the project that they originally paid you for. Ah fuck. I've confused myself now. Okay, maybe your philosophy is okay.

Leaves me to wonder, what prompted Barrett and Allwheelsdriven to design their own Subaru suspension, instead of going with JVAB stuff if it already existed for Subaru applications.

---

Grant Hughes

NoCoast Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> B- Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > The parts we build don't go on a clients's
> car
> > until proven on stage first. They are not
> the
> > guinea pigs for what they buy, it's tested
> and
> > proven before they get it.
>
> That there is one fucked up philosophy if I've
?> ever read one. Your customers are your best
> r&d department. Especially considering that
> you can get them to send you money now as a
> deposit, spend that money now on different
> projects now, then in a few years, try to get more
> money for a future project to fund the project
> that they originally paid you for. Ah fuck. I've
> confused myself now. Okay, maybe your philosophy
> is okay.
>
> Leaves me to wonder, what prompted Barrett and
> Allwheelsdriven to design their own Subaru
> suspension, instead of going with JVAB stuff if it
> already existed for Subaru applications.
>
> Grant Hughes
> www.nocoastmotorsports.net
> Denver, CO

Grant,

What was meant by that, was that it gets tested on my car in the gravel, on stage and proven first, prior to marketing them to clients. I'm glad that they are working well for Mike. The customer should know he's going to get a proven, finished product when it's time to shell out dough and put it on his car. There are things like strength, fitament issues, tolerances, overall lengths, etc, that got me started on building something other than the gamut of other suspension out there. Something between OEM and DMS on all levels was the intended result. It's not reinventing the wheel, just making it better for our applications. DMS wasn't ideal for me, and Bilstein is a proven suspension on stage. Additionally, somewhat local (same side of the country) to get parts from.


"Barret go re re-read, I'll put it bold italics where I said you were building things fro street and play----rally is play.

>Their "play" is work for you and I both. "They" put food on both of our tables..Some of those "players" have talent behind the wheel that may take them to another level beyond that.

So am I to understand that this thread was in fact you imagining that I had "barrowed" your design??

>No, it's just similar.

Barrett, I make and have made stuff for anybody that comes to my door, with any car for 23 years now and had already made two Subie car sets before I think you opened your doors for business.

>I've been modding/building/swapping these cars since the early 90's, not 23 years as you have, but still quite some time. As you have a broad knowledge base on Escorts, Ratties, and Volvos, I do on Subarus. We should have mutual respect for each others expertises. I have _almost_ as many Subie parts around as you do of the
Volvo, rattie, and cossie stuff. Just not the cats around.

As for the ear design, there's only so many ways to do it in low volume runs..

>Correct. or even in larger volumes
You know how to get things to work, and with a set length insert, the extra length needs to be in the ear or the top hat to get it to the proper ride height and in the proper part of the suspension stroke..I've only seen your bodies with recycled stock ears until the current variant. The machining and the style caught my eye.

and as I got an order for 22 Legassy/GC8/'02 50mm units that quantity justified laser cutting a series of ears front and rear, and one fellows ordering a set, Dave Amor from Ontario brought with him on a visit here a set of RSSP things by to look at I figured have a look at what's good and what can we make using some of their dimensional solutions at our smaller scale. The cap to the ears was done first 2 1/2 years ago on a "chop out 4" run, this time it was 40 units.
The main thing he brought them for was for was the centerline of strut to center of mount hole dimensions, and the overall length dimesions so as to avoid a mounting fiasco like with the Legacy that couldn't be brought up for a test fit---you know which car I am referring.
These 50mm units are 210mm travel so getting them installed without problems was critical, and the DMS and RSSP were likewise longer travel and also utilise larger OD springs so that and THOSE do mount up and have spring clearance.

>As they should work like that after having a good design and good templates to "borrow" measurement from. That's the way it _should_ go when the ducks are in a row prior to machining..That's part of the r&d process to get to a quality finished product that bolts up. The rssp's are pretty sweet and out of the majority of gravel set ups out there, are quite stout with their gusseting and 55/51 inserts. Still pretty busy, and a bit of a nightmare to service.

Having all 48 ex-GroupA inserts at the same length when the rear OAL is so much longer, and making all the tubes at the same length, the length has to come from somewhere, and dropping the ears down in the rear is the only way if we can't make the insert longer like everybody does, like the DMS units I had here.
It doesn't take very many minutes to figure out the drop thing when the other lengths are inflexibly set.
If you quote "spent a few years designing/perfecting" something that is perfectly obvious* with the other design limitations, and which I chopped out of cardboard in about 1- 1.5 ciggarettes time when Dave was here, then I think maybe you better turn up the heat on the seat where you do you designing, or start looking around an awful lot more at things beyond your current horisons.

>When I talk about the time spent on the ears, it wasn't the 1.5 smokes into a cardboard template, as much as dealing with machine shops f-ing specs up or things to that effect. Even when you have the right idea, another "cook" can spoil the soup..If it was perfectly obvious to you on your first iteration, why did you use old ears instead of the plate? Not pointing fingers at you, just noticing an interesting coincidence in the designs of the rears. Whatever.. that design works no matter what way it came about for you.

And if I was right in assuming that this thread is about me "barrowing" what you think is YOUR idea, then you need to publicly apologize for the accusation to me and to who ever it was that you backhandedly accused of forwarding your photos.

As I said, karma sucks, eh?

>Yes, Karma sucks, but wouldn't really consider this on a "Karmic" level. There are >enough things that really are Karma, or luck to help one realize that..Things >beyond our control.

>We've both "borrowed" some sort of proven design on our parts, and perhaps improved upon it. Neither one of us invented gravel coilovers, yet we still build them, of our own designs, and will continue to do so. Rally cars need proper suspension that is within reason budget-wise and holds up to the rigors of stage.

Now can we just have a smoke, a beer and get on with it?

Neither one of us can really bitch much next to Tim's dilemma..At least China's not building them..

---

Build the car, race the car, crash the car, fix the car..Repeat

Being completely outside the loop on this one, my first thought, as I began to read the original post, was I guess it's not such a bad thing if you're undercutting a large corporation which isn't going to see any real backlash from your actions, but no matter what I might save or how I might personally capitalize on bootlegging the design of someone who I know and respect, I couldn't do it.

It's still a relevant thought, if not one hell of a run-on sentence. Karma is always in play and moves through all religions. The longer you have to wait for it - good or bad - the more powerful it will be.

---

Brian Driggs | KG7KCA | PHX, AZ | 89 Pajero
alterius non sit qui suus esse potest

do you think there is a forum with a bunch of DMS and RS&SP engingeers and fabricators complaining about small shops copying them?

that bing said, i am glad there is more than one shop out there building affordable alternatives for rally suspension.