Seems to me that Mr. Friedman is only against Kemper because he does not make any money from it. That is his pure motivation and objection ... period.
Dave Friedman’s view of kemper.....
- Deej09
- Thread is marked as Resolved.
-
-
Seems to me that Mr. Friedman is only against Kemper because he does not make any money from it. That is his pure motivation and objection ... period.
Well, he's not against Gibson selling Gibsons and making momey doing so.
Surely there's some more reason here, however wrong he may be in his assessment.
-
Seems to me that Mr. Friedman is only against Kemper because he does not make any money from it. That is his pure motivation and objection ... period.
Well sure, having some perceived affect on your livelihood can certainly distort your sense of objectivity, no different than anyone else. I think the thing that rubs him the wrong way is that somebody can use his amp and name (a real, physical amp, not a model) to "capture" and then sell to others. He sees it as stealing off the back of his name and adding to the value of the product that is "stealing". I'm not saying I agree with that assessment, BTW.
-
I haven't checked the trademark search system on the U.S. Patent and Trademark office website, but I'd be willing to bet that Friedman has his name and all of the names of the amps he produces trademarked. If a profiler is using Mr. Friedman's trademarked names, then you can bet his attorneys will be going after the ingringers. I've heard some stories of specific and very prominent profilers who have received some nasty "cease and desist" letters from some very well known amp builders to stop using trademarked names. Suhr comes to mind.
I would agree with Mr. Friedman or any other trademark owner if their trademark is being infringed, but I don't think the use of a trademark is the real issue after watching the video. Just my take.
-
What I meant is they are using his amp and even if the name is altered to avoid trademark infringement, the consumer knows what it's a profile of and it's using his name/brand/work towards an outcome that somebody else is benefiting from.
-
I agree that using the Friedman name ( or any other commercial product) on profiles is a big no no. Commercial profilers use names that are different albeit a similar reference and usually say looking to create the sound of.....
Yes, it's a way to get around infringing on a trademark, but I don't think I made my point clear initially. I'm not talking about commercial sellers using similar names, even though we all understand what they're profiling. The real exchange for funds makes that more sticky. However, people give away free profiles using the trademarked names and even pictures of the amps, which adds value to the KPA. Kemper can't be held culpable for this, nor do I think they should, but that nonetheless doesn't make the amp builder very happy.
To make a profile you must have access to the hardware they built, and I think that's where many builders take exception.
When I spoke with Joe Morgan last year about the Kemper, I explained some things in a way he hadn't thought of before, but could still tell he didn't like people using his name on profiles or thinking that it was a replacement for his amp. When the conversation started he said that his amp was "already on the Kemper", referring to rmpacheco's classic profile that comes stock on the KPA. Mind you, the profile name is "Morgan AC20". That profile alone has added great value to the Kemper, so much so that Kemper themselves put it on there as a standard profile, or at least had in the past.
-
Yes, it's a way to get around infringing on a trademark, but I don't think I made my point clear initially. I'm not talking about commercial sellers using similar names, even though we all understand what they're profiling. The real exchange for funds makes that more sticky. However, people give away free profiles using the trademarked names and even pictures of the amps, which adds value to the KPA. Kemper can't be held culpable for this, nor do I think they should, but that nonetheless doesn't make the amp builder very happy.
To make a profile you must have access to the hardware they built, and I think that's where many builders take exception.
When I spoke with Joe Morgan last year about the Kemper, I explained some things in a way he hadn't thought of before, but could still tell he didn't like people using his name on profiles or thinking that it was a replacement for his amp. When the conversation started he said that his amp was "already on the Kemper", referring to rmpacheco's classic profile that comes stock on the KPA. Mind you, the profile name is "Morgan AC20". That profile alone has added great value to the Kemper, so much so that Kemper themselves put it on there as a standard profile, or at least had in the past.
Maybe in the future amp builders will protect their intellectual property by selling only a license for users to use their amp and they'll specifically disallow any profiling use. Eventually we'll get to where we have to download our tube amps......and wait for it...……...they'll be called profiles.
-
Yes, it's a way to get around infringing on a trademark, but I don't think I made my point clear initially. I'm not talking about commercial sellers using similar names, even though we all understand what they're profiling. The real exchange for funds makes that more sticky. However, people give away free profiles using the trademarked names and even pictures of the amps, which adds value to the KPA. Kemper can't be held culpable for this, nor do I think they should, but that nonetheless doesn't make the amp builder very happy.
To make a profile you must have access to the hardware they built, and I think that's where many builders take exception.
When I spoke with Joe Morgan last year about the Kemper, I explained some things in a way he hadn't thought of before, but could still tell he didn't like people using his name on profiles or thinking that it was a replacement for his amp. When the conversation started he said that his amp was "already on the Kemper", referring to rmpacheco's classic profile that comes stock on the KPA. Mind you, the profile name is "Morgan AC20". That profile alone has added great value to the Kemper, so much so that Kemper themselves put it on there as a standard profile, or at least had in the past.
I honestly do understand your point of view.
Although I do hope you do not use any of these profiles in your kemper so that you feel you are not getting around any infringement of trademark of any commercial or any other amps for that matter.
And if that’s the case I only hope you are using your own homemade amps that are profiled otherwise it’s a little hypocritical given your comments and point of view.
Unless I’ve completely missed your point?
-
Display More
I honestly do understand your point of view.
Although I do hope you do not use any of these profiles in your kemper so that you feel you are not getting around any infringement of trademark of any commercial or any other amps for that matter.
And if that’s the case I only hope you are using your own homemade amps that are profiled otherwise it’s a little hypocritical given your comments and point of view.
Unless I’ve completely missed your point?
Boy, it's no use adding caveats to any of my posts. Even when I share a perspective and explicitly say I don't agree entirely with it, it's as if it goes unread or unnoticed and becomes entirely attributed to me. It doesn't mean they're all devils just because they're not all angels.
-
This whole topic is really quite interesting from the perspective of logic. If I profile an amp that I bought, is that different than if I buy a profile of the same amp from a commercial profiler? I was joking about amp builders going to selling licenses, but if I bought the amp, its mine. There is nothing remaining in that tube amp that belongs to Friedman or Suhr or Marshall. They retain their trademark and the right to profit from the use of their name, but I could modify the circuit or even gut the chassis and build my own hand wired version ( which I have done with my Fender DRRI). Similarly, I can sell the amp to another person, or I could profile my amp and sell 40 million profiles of it. We can't really have a meaningful discussion without understanding intellectual property law. When Friedman gets a patent for his circuit, (which he won't because there is no way he can show that anything in the circuit is actually original or new) then we'll have an interesting discussion, but until that happens, there really is no real issue, just amp makers whining over what they think is somehow fair.
I hope that it is clear that I have no personal beef with Mr. Friedman, and that I'm using his name to represent amp builders in general. Peace.
-
Even when I share a perspective and explicitly say I don't agree entirely with it, it's as if it goes unread or unnoticed and becomes entirely attributed to me.
If you don’t agree with it then why share it unless you are deliberatively being argumentative or provocative? Why not share the view you DO agree with?
Again I reiterate what I state in a post earlier - it’s your view and you are entitled to it.
Being from a profession that is from a legal basis it just seems odd to me? And again being from that background I do love a good debate......?.
-
If you don’t agree with it then why share it unless you are deliberatively being argumentative or provocative? Why not share the view you DO agree with?
There are nuances that in some cases are being ignored, not considered, or misrepresented. There also doesn't have to be a wholesale right or wrong answer for these things, like Dave saying it's all piracy or Kemper users saying Dave only rips off Marshall's. Just as Dave can be predisposed to talk out of his ass in regards to Kemper, as can Kemper users who feel offended that Dave openly denigrates the gear they use. In my attempt to help the conversation steer itself back to something less divisive, I've basically been forced into constantly "defending" the view of Friedman and other amp builders who have expressed similar concerns because they're quickly written off.
I think at this point it's pretty much run its course.
-
I think at this point it's pretty much run its course.
In your opinion..although you do appear to want to have the last word.
-
I've basically been forced into constantly "defending" the view of Friedman and other amp builders who have expressed similar concerns because they're quickly written off.
Oh and can I add “who” has “forced” you to say or do anything?
-
This entire thread illustrates a couple of points of view as they relate to digital modelling/profiling versus analog tube amps and those emotions and arguments appear to be tangled up in the discussion of what is ethical and what is legal. From my experience and training, I don't believe that the circuit copying that Mr. Friedman or other amp tweakers are doing is illegal. Similarly, profiling amps or circuits which cannot be patented or otherwise protected, is not illegal. The ethics of what people do is another discussion entirely and sometimes what is legal is not entirely ethical. We all have opinions. I personally do not find it objectionable that some people profile amplifiers that have been built by other people for the reasons state above. YMMV, Peace.
-
Oh and can I add “who” has “forced” you to say or do anything?
I don't mean literally "forced", but if somebody gives me a response that I have some disagreement with or can build on, I take the time to best explain either my or the "amp builders" line of thinking/prospective response. I do because it's interesting to me, as are things philosophical & sociological. At no point did I insult anybody despite some of the comments overtly and passively suggested towards me.
Over time I've seen enough examples of people here and on other forums taking cheap swipes and the mob cheering it together. This particular thread just interested me and I felt I had some constructive things to share. I tried my best to stay on point but inevitably somebody is going to turn this topic about me and questioning my intentions, as if it were germane.
BTW, I don't need the last word. If I have something to add, I will. Plenty of times in this thread I've read posts and let many go by without feeling the need to respond or repeat many of the same points. But if you ask me a question, I'm likely to respond. Doesn't make sense to ask a question, get a response, and then accuse me of wanting the last word...
-
The ethics of what people do is another discussion entirely and sometimes what is legal is not entirely ethical.
Totally agreed, and we of course don't all agree on what those ethics are, how we feel about them, and to what degree we take them. But any good, fruitful discussion about such a topic should include honest representation of where each perspectives ethics come from.
-
From my perspective, Mementomori has tried to illustrate part of why -- and possibly -- some amp makers feel the way they do. It's not as if Friedman sat down for an hour to explain to detail what his arguments and thoughts are.. not that this totally should be the "end of it"; and it could be argued he should explain more, provided the strength of the claim.
Still, to my perception, when this is the case, it's probably charitable to try and arrive at some further understanding.
This doesn't have to mean some "anti-kemper" bias on one's part or that someone just flat out thinks "kemper is piracy", depending on what this means exactly. (And it's possible that something is not piracy in a strict legalistic sense, but nonetheless can be morally problematic for some of the same reasons piracy is. It's even possible we'd want to extend a legalistic concept of piracy. These are complex issues as I'm sure people here understand).
In fact, I would think that engaging in the above is essential when it comes to even figuring out where we stand to begin with, how likely we are to hold "sound' views ourselves, pla pla. And then a separate reason: considering such a thread can end up in a kind of witch hunt that perhaps encourages even more "distancing" it's good to see an effort towards understanding.
Surely that goes both ways -- and I'd hope Friedman and other amp makers who think similarly, to the level they may, go a bit deeper into this topic and think through things more IF and where such an effort is lacking. Reactionism wont help much when it's indeed what happens. And yes, there's moral considerations about public rhetoric too. Most certainly.
