Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/01/11
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Marc, Since you are a lawyer, I won't split legal hairs with you. But when Rudolph (Zeiss employee) designed the Tessar as a modified lens based on Taylor's Triplet (1894) was this borrowed? Also, the Zeiss Biotar of 1911 was a high-speed modification of the Petzval-lens, Dr. Petzval was employed by Voigtlander, did Voigtlander sell Zeiss this lens design? Dr. Smakula's patent for a lens coating (patented in 1935) was based on the earlier findings of Josef von Fraunhofer, (1817) who noted that weathered surfaces enabled higher light transmissions, and those of Dennis Taylor (1904), an English optician who used an acid treatment to lower the refraction index of a surface. Wasn't the Contax I of 1932 with its focal plane shutter very Leica-like in its design (borrowed design ideas perhaps?). My points are not to piss you off, but to simply point out that people do borrow from others. BTW, when did Zeiss buy Goerz? Peter K - -----Original Message----- From: Marc James Small [mailto:msmall@roanoke.infi.net] Sent: Sunday, January 10, 1999 9:13 PM To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us Subject: RE: [Leica] Design Thievery At 08:12 PM 1999-01-10 -0800, Peter Kotsinadelis wrote: > >Legally you are right, but even if they owned Goerz let's just say they >borrowed some of their intellectual property. Let's leave this one die. >Fact of the matter is that within the optical industry people just borrow. >Like Apple borrowed the idea of the MAC OS from Xerox, WIndows from MAC, >etc. Fact is only the strong survive, Leica, Zeiss, Microsoft, and perhaps >even Apple. There is a huge difference between borrowing an unprotectable concept and stealing a protected design. Anyone can build a car: the idea of a four-wheeled, gasoline-driven vehicle is too general to be patented. BUT if started production of, say, an exact copy of the Ford Taurus, you would find yourself in Court posthaste, as you would be violating Ford's patents. Nikon and Canon STOLE Leitz and Zeiss designs. Leitz and Zeiss tried to sue to protect their rights and to receive compensation for their injuries, but the Allies -- specifically, the Occupation Authorities in Japan -- refused, on the grounds that they wished to foster a civilian optical industry in Japan. The Allies did NOT "seize" these rights, and it was acknowledged by the Allies that the patents still belonged to Zeiss and Leitz. They simply refused to allow the Germans to protect their rights in Court. This changed in '49 -- when Germany became independent again -- and in '54, when Japan did the same. Yashica thereupon stole Rollei's patents to produce their 44 design. Franke & Heidecke sued, and won. Zeiss and Leitz should have been afforded the same privilege a decade earlier. Marc msmall@roanoke.infi.net FAX: +540/343-7315 Cha robh bas fir gun ghras fir!