Ethics and morals. (This is, admittedly, long.)

[blahblahblahbrah]

First of all, forgive me.  I'm about to broach a topic that I know has been discussed many times before and in many other places.  I know that, because I have spent the morning scouring the web, reading the discussions, and questioning myself and what kind of human being I am.  The question is about, you guessed it...selling pedals that are clones of, or heavily based on, other pedals. 

I can hear the collective groan, but bear with me, because I want to phrase the question in a slightly different way, and that is this.  At what point in the modification of an existing pedal, whether in production or not, does it become okay, or at least an acceptable level of douchebagness, to take a pedal, put your own name on it, and sell it?  There's a reason I ask.

I've taken this up as a hobby.  I've built a pedal that's basically a clone of a popular and available pedal on the market today.  It's well laid out and well put together.  I'd back it.  I have made some minor modifications to the circuit to twist it to my taste and add some features that are important to me, but here's the deal.

Like I said, this is a hobby for me.  It's something I've always been interested in, since I was a teenager.  I'm just now at a point in life where I have the time and funds to mess with it.  So, I've been building these pedals, and just giving them away, to friends, at my own expense.  I enjoy it.  It's fun.  And I've made no secret to anyone that I've given one to what the pedal is base on.  But, it just so happens that one of my friends is, and please pardon the phrase, I know how contrived and corny it sounds, but "in the business."  He is employed by a very, very, very, very high profile artist that has been a staple of rock radio since the early 70's.  I made it clear to him that this pedal is, for all intents and purposes, a clone.  And I had no motivation when I gave him the pedal.  I've made one for just about everyone I know that plays.  I can't help what the guy does for a living.  But, he LOVES it, and he's told me that if I will add one additional necessary feature, and the name I've been using isn't any sort of trademark violation, he'll get the pedal on the board of this prominent artist.

And I've been thinking about it...and I can't do it.  It just doesn't feel right.  If there's one thing I try to be, it's honest.  And I'll be honest here.  I haven't been doing this long.  I understand basic concepts behind basic effects like overdrives and boosts, as well as the fundamental ideas and concepts behind tube amps.  But that's it.  My knowledge doesn't extend much further than that.  I can tweak a circuit, but I could never hope to design one on my own.  But hardly anyone designs circuits, right?.  They're almost all derivative of something that came before.  So at what point in that derivation does it become acceptable to say "I've changed this enough that I feel like I can call it mine, put my name on it, and maybe ask for a little bit of compensation"?

I don't want to rip anyone off.  I don't want to be a douche.  I know what it is to work.  I've spent the last 15 years of my life doing what is often back-breaking, body-wearing work, in the direct service of other people.  And making very, very little money for it.  If you said that what I often manage to do from week to week is "get by", you'd be giving a very generous appraisal of the situation.  So, I'm not trying to pat myself on the back here, at all.  I guess what I'm trying to say is this.

I don't want to profit off of the ideas of others, and I'm not out to make a bunch of money or even a living.  But I do like the idea of being part of something cool, something epic. 
So...is there anything wrong with building a couple of these pedals, and just giving them to the guy?  With no plan for compensation or recognition?  Just for the satisfaction of knowing that something I built with my hands is resting on this ICON's pedal board?

But then, also, if I were to keep modifying the circuit and finally get it exactly how I like it, how will I know when it's acceptable to ask to be paid for the service?  I don't know if I'll ever get something to that point of comfort, honestly.  Because, as I said, my knowledge on the subject is limited.  I was just curious.

And finally, while keeping that in mind, and realizing that I might actually have a little clout should I come up with something halfway original, I've asked for help from a friend who is extremely knowledgeable in all areas of electronics to see if we might come up with something less derivative and see if we might get that in someone's hands.  Am I making any sense, here?  I've got a lot on my mind and I'm asking several questions.  I think you get me.  And I don't want to make this any longer than it already is, so I'm just going to STFU now.  Sorry for any trouble.

[familyortiz]

As you've pointed out, all designs are based on something else to some extent or another. A simple change in an existing design is the basis for a design patent, period. It's done all the time.
The issues that you are wrestling with is a daily occurrance in the world of capitalism. If you make a change and the result is a different sound, then you deserve whatever it is that you think is reasonable in the way of compensation. It is obvious that you care about the situation... there are many cheeseballs out there, doing worse things for much more than they deserve. I don't mean that to sound like a rationalization, but just the way things are.

[modsquad]

You are way too uptight about this whole thing...

First, most pedals I would argue are tweeks of others work nowadays.   Look how many tubescreamer clones are sold.   Some guys are pretty wrapped around the axle about this but IMO as long as its not an exact clone of someone else's work(PCB, componentts) and you have made some modifications and additions, you can claim it as your own.   I don't think you are going to put anyone out of business.  Just my 2 cents.

[markeebee]

First up, I give you huge props for your honesty. Good work.

My opinion is: if you physically hand someone the pedal (even if they're not the end user) and you say "I've made this and it's very closely modelled on a Burst Box (or whatever)", then your moral bucket remains full.

If you later sell the same model in multiple numbers through a third party and have no way of imparting that same message, you are a shill.

IMHO.

[Govmnt_Lacky]

I have only two responses to this:

1) Did you actually create ANOTHER account just to post this rant? It is odd that such a well spoken and informed rant would be the 1st post of a forum newbie 

2) I say that if you have created something different, even if it is "based" on another design, then you would be a fool for NOT taking advantage of the opportunity that you  are presented with. As long as you have "made it your own" then you should have nothing to fear. 

[CynicalMan]

I think that's the longest first post I've ever seen...

IMO, being electronically innovative is important, but being innovative in terms of sound and versatility is far more important. So, someone could have innovative pedal designs up to their earlobes that make a guitar sound like crap, and I'd still prefer to buy the same old tube screamer clone. But, if you take an existing circuit and tweak it so it's something new-ish and sounds great, I respect that innovation far more, even if you didn't make many changes. So, if you can make a pedal that makes useful and unheard-of sounds, or that is more versatile than the stuff on the market for the same price, that's innovation.

Just a sidenote though, overdrive and fuzzes are a really saturated market. If you are going to market a new pedal, I wouldn't go into that area immediately unless you can make an absolutely life-changing pedal.

If you clone old cash-cow pedals, like the Tube Screamer, and undercut people's prices, I don't think it's unethical because that means more people can get those pedals and they have more money left over. Ultimately you're supporting musicians. You're letting them get these pedals, and letting them innovate more. Also, by undercutting these old designs, you're encouraging companies to come out with something new. I don't support people who clone new and innovative designs, but there's a point where you'll cause more innovation in general by competing with big companies. For me, the music always comes first before the stompbox industry.

Now, let me get my popcorn...

[tiges_ tendres]

I don't think you mentioned this, but are you using your own pcb layout?

[frequencycentral]

What pedal is it please?

[blahblahblahbrah]

Did you actually create ANOTHER account just to post this rant? It is odd that such a well spoken and informed rant would be the 1st post of a forum newbie 

I am educated and informed, just not in this particular field, ha ha.  But like I said, I've been reading, casually, about this stuff for a long time.

I don't think you mentioned this, but are you using your own pcb layout?

No PCB, eyelet board.

[Johan]

if the original design was a song you wrote, instead of a stompbox someone else builds. and someone changed a few words in one of the verses then claimed it to be HIS song....how would you feel?

..why not instead tell your customers about a great mod to that pedal, that you can perform for some pay.. they bring you the pedal. the original manufator sells a pedal, you sell your mod, everybody gets paid, customer gets a modified/special/improved version of the stomper and everybody gets/stays happy...

[Hides-His-Eyes]

Man up and build him the pedal. As a general rule, the less original a manufacturer's designs are, the louder they condemn cloning. So you have mike fuller at one end of the scale, someone like Mr Holt at the other.

We are not inventing novel uses for components; to a non-musical EE, there are only a handful of fuzz designs. Almost all of what we do comes under "tweak to taste".

When someone buys a product, the circuit itself is only a slice of the pie. Presentation, build quality, TIME and EFFORT, these are the things being bought.

Imagine a new thread;

"I've been making meals from recipe books as a hobby. One of my friends, who is in with some big chefs, absolutely loved the souffle I made from Delia's book (with a few tweaks of my own.) My friend says the chef would love to come over for dinner and try my souffle. But, I didn't invent souffle! Is this unethical?"

"Big muff" is a recipe. "fuzz face", "tone bender"; recipes.

Analogman Sun Face is a meal, tweaked, presented nicely on white plates. Way Huge Swollen Pickle is a meal. EHX big muff pie is also a meal. Both made from the same recipe, but done in different ways by different 'chefs'.

[Hides-His-Eyes]

if the original design was a song you wrote, instead of a stompbox someone else builds. and someone changed a few words in one of the verses then claimed it to be HIS song....how would you feel?

..why not instead tell your customers about a great mod to that pedal, that you can perform for some pay.. they bring you the pedal. the original manufator sells a pedal, you sell your mod, everybody gets paid, customer gets a modified/special/improved version of the stomper and everybody gets/stays happy...

All's well and good in the american dream but some of the 'classic' fuzzes have been out of production for decades.

[Mark Hammer]

I don't want to seem dismissive, but boy oh boy has this topic been covered off here before, at great length.  I suspect the only thing you'll find more posts about is the Tube Screamer!

[thedefog]

I think it helps to approach this from the perspective of music writing.

The concept of genuine inspiration is a romanticized idea created to make someone seem more significant. You can say that a Blues guitarist's performance at a show was inspired, but ultimately they are still playing over the same old blues progression (not ripping on blues here, just an example of how all musical ideas are borrowed and based off of each other).

From the perspective of circuit creation, there are infinite ways to arrange resistors, capacitors, transistors, ICs, etc. Only, like in music, only certain combinations work while most others don't. You have to start from somewhere, and the simpler the starting point or design (as in boost and overdrive, or musical styling), the more difficult it becomes to vary it from others.

That being said, It's one thing to take a pre-made pedal, throw some metal film caps in it, change some resistors and an LED, and sell it for a profit (ahem..), and another to experiment with a schematic and build it on a breadboard, make some changes to it that you prefer better to the original, solder it onto a perfboard, and throw it in a case to sell to a few friends and hope to get back a little more than you paid for the parts for your efforts.

[Galego]

If it's a one off request by someone, i don't see a problem with it. I'm sure that if he went to Boss or Ibanez asking them "please add a switch to do [some feature]" they wouldn't even reply. So, he's basically paying you for a service, to assemble the effect he wants the way he wants.

If you decided to go into full production of an effect that's just a clone, then i wouldn't think that's right. I think it's fine to build clones on request, but if you go and put names into other people's designs and sell them as originals than that's really low, though many do that.

[aron]

I guess only you can decide what is morally correct for yourself. The law is the law and the rest is up to you.

A question was asked, did you create another account to ask this question? If so, I don't think you should feel like you have to do this to ask this question. Especially when IP is shown at bottom right of messages.

Aron

[amptramp]

I absolutely agree that you should conduct all business honestly.

I wonder if this musical icon that you have not named yet is the type of guy who natters on about how Napster and other file-sharing applications are cutting the branches off his money tree?  If so, tell him your product would not be suitable for him.  I doubt he would object.

If the pedal is not in production, I see no problem at all because there would be no damages unless someone gets in a legal snit about restarting production - and they will never have the opportunity to follow a money trail if the pedals are given away and not sold.  I collect antique radios and there is a standard design that lasted from the 1930's through the 1960's called the "All-American Five" - a standard 5-tube radio that was sold in the hundreds of millions by hundreds of manufacturers with minor variations in tube complement and certain design details.  Every radio collector can draw this schematic from memory.  Unless you are violating a patent or copyright that is still in force. there is no legal issue.  If you are cloning a tube screamer, do not call it an Ibanez tube screamer or use its model designations like TS808 - that would violate the company's copyright of its own name.  I doubt there would be any possibility of repercussions if the design has been changed in any way to accommodate some difference like a change in capacitors to change frequency response.

One interesting example of designs being similar - when people started using roller rocker arms on pushrod engines, one enterprising individual found that rockers designed for a small-bleck Chevy were an exact fit on an American Motors 390 engine.  Even though I am a patent holder, I am not of the opinion that a patent gives the owner the right to bring innovation to a screeching halt.  And most designs are old enough that any intellectual property has expired.

[Derringer]

What pedal is it please?

[blahblahblahbrah]

I guess only you can decide what is morally correct for yourself. The law is the law and the rest is up to you.

A question was asked, did you create another account to ask this question? If so, I don't think you should feel like you have to do this to ask this question. Especially when IP is shown at bottom right of messages.

Aron

Yes, I did.  I've posted here before, though very rarely.  I take a RMPL philosophy on nearly every board in which I'm a member.  So, I've snooped here a lot, and learned much, but I rarely post.  I'm no one that anyone would know, I just wanted anonymous feedback.  

[Steve Mavronis]

I say just add the extra feature he wants and build it for him. All it's gonna do is end up on the artist's pedalboard, so what? I did the same thing giving one of mine to an up and coming recording artist (imho) but if he digs your pedal too that's a good thing. Your custom pedal effect will end up on an album and many people will enjoy hearing it. Be proud and do it for the music bro!

And if you have given it a non-copyrighted name with your own custom PCB circuit layout and choose to give it away or sell it by request, no problem it's up to you if there's demand. Even an with an effect being 'based' on anything prior - well that's what so many pedal companies have done over and over trying to improve on things from the past bascially re-packaging the same effect with a slight new twist. We all build on prior knowledge and history. That's my opinion and I take it as a fact too. I've stressed out like you thinking about the same thing over the past year, but now I'm just enjoying my clone for myself and can't wait for the album that my one other copy of it is appearing on to soon be released. It's all good don't worry about it and enjoy the hobby because that's why you got into it in the first place!