But more expensive pens or ones made elsewhere are not. There are only so many basic geometric shapes, no one has a patent on the hexagon. Every single company makes cigar shaped pens but they aren’t being called knockoffs or clones. And even the ones that are even similar looking but not identical are still called clones. There are a few that even I would agree actually are clones such as the cap-less pens that use the same patented mechanisms but the term is getting way over used.
You must log in or # to comment.
No one has a patent on the hexagon, but many Chinese pens are copies of those from other “real” manufacturers down to copying the feed and nib designs, cartridges, etc. There is also the widespread phenomenon of knockoff Lamy styled pens which have stolen the rather distinctive Lamy visual design while also often remaining maddeningly incompatible with genuine Lamy nibs and cartridges. It’s impossible to scroll through any list of Chinese fountain pens without passing by several Lami Safari clones.
Quite a few Majohn/Moonman pens are explicit rip-offs of Montblanc designs, and they’ve even knocked off the Ohto Tasche with their N1. The Jinhao “75” is a rip-off of the Parker Sonnet. Tons of pens are rip-offs of the Parker 51, typically its revived incarnation, including like half of Jinhao’s entire product line. Etc., etc. It’s not just the retractables.
I can see copying parker’s trademark arrow clip but that is the only thing I am seeing that might be considered “cloned” on the 75.
?
Jinhao 75 (image cribbed from an eBay listing):
Parker Sonnet (image taken from Parker’s website):
The grip section, nib shape, cap band, clip, and body shape are all exact duplicates. I’m pretty sure the sections are even interchangeable.
The only differences are the nib itself (obviously) and its engravings, and a slight shape change to the top of the cap.
I’m of a split-mind on this one – especially having been through a bunch of these debates in custom keyboards, and watches…
Here’s the thing: many of the design elements of these objects (pens, watches, etc.) have existed far longer than a copyright or patent was ever intended to provide protection for. So, claiming that things are a “knock off” or “clone” is somewhat disingenuous.
However, there is a different side to this: there is a design language that these companies are putting into their products. They are making specific choices about dimensions, materials used, proportions, etc. that are explicitly part of their brand. So when another company makes a product that (nearly) completely replicates all of these design elements – it’s easy to see where they are copies, and not just an “inspired by” product.
I do t really see a problem with what the Chinese brands are doing, except the ones that are trying to fool someone they’re the real deal.
They copy the aesthetic with as many corners cut to still remain good, and they don’t put on the logos or names of the brands they copy.
Of course I’m not saying they are equivalent. A Lamy 2000 will never be the same as the moonman/jinhao (I forgot who has a clone) ones.
Same with the VP copies. Although tbf to that one, the patent ended so it’s find legally (as if the Chinese brands care), but whatever shade of grey morally / ethically.
I do t really see a problem with what the Chinese brands are doing, except the ones that are trying to fool someone they’re the real deal.
Yes, if they are using the logo or specific copyrighted / trademarked elements of a brand then they are committing a crime. And that’s not just a problem in pens, it’s a problem across all products.
However, once there is no copyright, patent, trademark or service mark applying to a brand, a technology, etc. then there is nothing that is stopping anyone from using it. And that’s not just China.
We’ve seen this time and again. Just recently, a certain scammer started buying up brands that everyone used to know, like Radio Shack, Pier 1, and a bunch more. Once purchased, he started running a bunch of garbage under them. There was another company that bought up Victrola and started selling cheap Chinese record players. All of these were Americans, and all of it perfectly legit. (Where things weren’t legit was when he scammed his investors.)
Of course, there are some people that buy up old brands that no longer have copyrights / patents / etc. and try to do right with them. Like the guys that bought up the Commodore or Amiga (I forgot which one already…). Or in something a little more on target for this community: Conklin.
I largely think that these are the categories that people should look at:
- Companies that try to pass off their products as someone else’s products. Especially when they are infringing on another companies existing copyrights, patents, trademarks, or service marks.
- Companies that buy the rights to old / existing brands and produce garbage under those brands.
- Companies that buy the rights to old brands, and try to bring them back to market in an honorable, or at least reasonable, manner.
