3 ms·
Okay, a first-to-market scenario like you describe doesn't fit with the 'rip off' mentality, and I get that. It's simply herding toward a new market by way of b
by 6stringmerc 11y ago
Okay, a first-to-market scenario like you describe doesn't fit with the 'rip off' mentality, and I get that. It's simply herding toward a new market by way of being the first to get traction. Sure, if Amazon Basics sells a 'household paper shredder' it's not like the concept was lifted whole cloth, and the manufacturing diversity is already inherent. That's fine, I see that.
But, that's not at all what I'm describing though, and which is far more destructive: if an actual, innovative product gets copied. If such cases are rare with Amazon as the copying entity, it still matters from a recourse standpoint. So, in a different example, if a company creates an innovative paper cutter, unlike any other on the market, patents it, makes it, and it sells well, this is the scenario: if 15 months later Amazon Basics has a design and functioning clone at a price that undercuts the original, then that should be a case to hash out in court and if violating trade / patent protections, slapped with punitive fines.
- brianwawok 11y agoSure anyone who violates a patent and sells it should be punished. I am sure it happens, but it doesn't seem to be what most of Amazon Basics is doing...