The IndiMatte...Resistance is futile

Postmaster said:
I know what you mean Tim, I had several ideas stolen from me and I know how that feels.

Thinking only in profit and $$$ is a nasty habit that brought us to the situation where we are today.

Lot´s of great ideas where strangled to death by patent loyers and legal action. Here in Germany the "Telecom " patented the "T" and the Color Magenta so nobody can use that color or thet letter anymor for a logo.

Is it that what you call creativity or is it exactly that what actually kills creativity by - so called - law?

You should think more in terms of Inspiration than in terms of steeling.

The Indians copyed (more or less) some feature of the vocas box. O.K.

But you can compare the Indian box to some of the same indian boxes that get repackt and maybe a bit revamped and sold in America under several brand and names. I there something saying they stolen that design from those poor indians or even from Vocas?

For your last question:

Designig a good mattebox is no rocket science. Every $20 exhaust muffler is more complicated, got more material and more engeneering in it than a simple mattebox.

I have several ideas how to improof a mattebox for my needs and I build one for me.
But will I market it?

How big is the risk, that someone may copy it and how big is the risk that someone will put up some legal action against me because mine looks similar to the one he patented?

I would rather get copied than sued.

Frank
Click to expand...

Thinking in terms of profit and not inspiration is what brought us the knock off situation in the first place. They're not doing it out of some populist notion to help the little guy afford a matte box. Instead of R&D or licensing, they make knock offs for one reason - money. They're too uninspired and greedy to do it any other way. By your cost analysis they should be able to sell it at a price in which every family can have a matte box of their own for the price of a blender. Fat chance. After letting the originator do all the R&D and marketing of a good design, with the help of piss poor wages and gruesome conditions, they often sell at a profit margin higher than the real product.

You're right it isn't rocket science which is why they should find some inspiration beyond copying.

But please don't infer I find your Telecom example creative. It's about as creative as the term "thinking outside of the box" (that old middle manager chestnut).

I agree patent law has gotten ridiculous with the example of the Telecom logo and that's due for a change (and most likely will be struck down in the near future based on pending legistlation) but it's also an extreme example much further than the specific design infringement in the case I'm citing.

Regarding "inspiration" you somehow take a leap in logic and infer that I'm more obsessed with stealing and not inspiration. Where you find inspiration in knockoffs confounds me. I find inspiration in what Red Rock is doing. I find inspiration in what all the low cost adaptor makers are doing - improving their product every month it seems. I find inspiration in the Tizio lamp. I found inspiration in Apple (though not recently). But in the case of the Vocas knock offs, I find their inspiration comes from parasites.

With your great ideas (and I reckon you have a few), you'd be a fool to market them without a proper patent search, minimizing risk. Bell, Marconi, Edison, all did it before bringing brilliance to the stage. When you make a film, you'll shell out for errors and omissions insurance, to protect against the one that got away. It's the cost of doing business right.

But without copyright or patent law much of the gear you use, the books you read, the movies and music you love wouldn't even be an inspiration.
 
Last edited:
It all comes down to who has the best quality design at the cheapest price.

There are rip offs all over the place, I hate to say and nothing can be done unless the original designer takes legal action.

This Vocas matte box design is everywhere and companies are passing it off
as their own design with minor tune ups. As long as people know what they are buying and it's not the original but works close enough then they don't care.
The RR matte box has strong similarities to Chrosziel's Mattebox and the
L arm close to Arri. I guess their only problem why it's taking them this
long to put it to market is making the filter holders and rotating stages.


All in all this is a race to meet the filmmakers needs and budget.
we all know budding low filmmakers would find it hard to invest in
in expensive extras when what comes first is a good camera
and talent.

There is yet to be a Perfect Matte box and Follow focus that is excellent in
all areas for a low budget filmmaker. Maybe someday some one will come close as far as design quality and cost....
 
lisa hayse said:
It all comes down to who has the best quality design at the cheapest price.

There are rip offs all over the place, I hate to say and nothing can be done unless the original designer takes legal action.

This Vocas matte box design is everywhere and companies are passing it off
as their own design with minor tune ups. As long as people know what they are buying and it's not the original but works close enough then they don't care.
The RR matte box has strong similarities to Chrosziel's Mattebox and the
L arm close to Arri. I guess their only problem why it's taking them this
long to put it to market is making the filter holders and rotating stages.


All in all this is a race to meet the filmmakers needs and budget.
we all know budding low filmmakers would find it hard to invest in
in expensive extras when what comes first is a good camera
and talent.

There is yet to be a Perfect Matte box and Follow focus that is excellent in
all areas for a low budget filmmaker. Maybe someday some one will come close as far as design quality and cost....
Click to expand...

The unique features of the Chrosziel (hard mattes, filter trays, etc) and the Arri L arm have all been around more than 20 years (public domain). The Vocas internal eyebrows have not. I agree most of the users don't care whether it's a knock off or a outright patent infringement and being low budget fillmmakers will always lean to cheap over expensive, it's human nature.


I just wonder at what point do you draw the line in supporting a bootleg economy. To support it for anyone in the creative arts is hypocrisy. When you're painting, writing, designing clothes or furniture, or produce a movie over a few years that gets stolen and sold for cheap before you made your money back, do you just throw up your hands and say, "those people wouldn't pay ten dollars to see my film anyway." You'd be gutted when it happens to you.

I'm all for meeting the low budget filmmaker's needs and within the year there will be matte boxes and FFocus's that meet and exceed professional expectations at an Indy prices and clear of infringement. It'll be done by truly "inspired" companies.

I always think about the "Steadicam". The patent made it safe and secure enough for Garret Brown to pursue and refine it. He profited handsomely for 20 years. The day the patent ran out, knocks offs blew through the door and in a few cases made a good thing better. But if he knew he'd be cannabalized shortly after it was introduced, would he have invested the time and money. Would he have been able to raise money from investors to make it happen? Doubtful.

Counterfeit, pirated goods and patent infringement has run in excess of 200 billion this year. It's rife with subsistent wages, dangerous conditions and mob connections. It costs us dearly in lost jobs, wages, investment and inspirations - especially in the film business. For a moment stop thinking just about your film and think about the industry at large and where you stand on protecting intellectual property (scripts, designs, inventions, movies, etc). And perhaps you'll buy a matte box that isn't lifting someone's patent.

To say there's nothing we can do about it misses where you can - start with your wallet and spend with a conscience.
 
Last edited:
Without going into the names of the companies doing the appropriating, I would also point to doing business with a company who takes the time, money and interest in protecting their intellectual property. It would be a gross generalization to say that they would provide better customer service, but I still prefer to work with known, authorized and vested business interests.

Conversely, you can send people money for products that literally aren't on the shelf and... wait. Then, when there are issues, and there is a paid crew waiting on you, you have no recourse. They have no back-up resources, no contingency plan.

I wouldn't stake something as big as a film or television shoot on one product that has been proven to fail in the field and has no replacement pieces available as a back-up.

If your knock-off fails, is there an infrastructure to back it up? That infrastructure, which makes every product somewhat more expensive, is part of the enhanced customer experience when you buy Chrosziel or P+S and rent from established houses and so forth.

e
 
POSTED BY Tim Naylor;
I'm all for meeting the low budget filmmaker's needs and within the year there will be matte boxes and FFocus's that meet and exceed professional expectations at an Indy prices and clear of infringement. It'll be done by truly "inspired" companies.
Click to expand...


Yes this is going to happen with no doubt.
I just hope it would happen soon so all these indian knock offs
would just go away Leaving us with top quality gear.

But that's probably not going to happen unless like Tim said we the people
make an effort to support the Quality designer with good prices.


L. Hayse
 
Tim Naylor said:
They're accusations if correct as well.
Click to expand...

I'm aware of that, what I meant are they can leave a huge negative stigma on people's mind if they take your opinion as the gospel truth.

And cars too are all made to do the same thing as well, which is carry passengers and roll. The concept of a car is not patentable. But if Ford designed a car that looked just like a Porsche 911 there would be infringement on the design of the body though not the concept of a car. But by some twisted logic, some would say, what would be the crime if Ford buyers would never buy a Porsche? Don't be naive.
Click to expand...

I have no idea who you're responding to, I never said or suggested anything like that. But I guess you never saw a hyundai or kia made before the year 2001, I swear some of those were lifted.

Many people say they wouldn't pay 1500 for a Gucci bag but would buy a knock off in Chinatown for 200. To say that doesn't hurt Gucci's sales is beyond ignorant.
Click to expand...

Never said that, but you are dealing in extremes here. It is pretty safe to say that a lot of people that buy Gucci knock-offs would never buy real Gucci. But once again a Gucci knock is more than stealing the shape of bags, they put fake Gucci labels on and the whole 9. That doesn't really translate to something like a matte box, but I do see your point, not that I ever disagreed with it.

There's a size able segment that not given the alternative would save up for it.
Click to expand...

For what? Bags, cars, or matte boxes?
Bags and cars - no.
Matte boxes - yeah sure maybe.

Also knock offs have the effect of lowering the value of the genuine article. The originator gets stiffed on both ends.
Click to expand...

Depending on the industry it's in or deals with.

If knock offs had no effect on sales then Vocas wouldn't be taking action.
Click to expand...

I never said it didn't.

I don't think cinevate or indifocus stole anything. I think they outsourced from a company that did.
Click to expand...

Given the argument you've put up that should make little, if any difference considering your stand point.

The mods are minor. The materials absolutely inferior (on the Indian one). But one look at the Vocas and easy to conclude it was not likely a design innocently stumbled upon. From the shape, bracing, to the internal eyebrows.
Click to expand...

You're probably right, but then again I wasn't vouching for the indian matte box, ever. Or anyone else for that matter.

I've studied the designs of Redrock and looked at and worked with just about every Mattebox ever made from ancient Arris, Mitchells, Panavisions, Arri MB's, Chrosz, Petroff, to the velcro one and I've yet to see a design like RRocks. It looks to me like they're doing it from the ground up. It could be the reason it's taking so long. You know, design, spec, parts, protos, test, design again, etc....
Click to expand...

That's cool and great for them, I might buy it when it comes out.

But I think you've missed my point.
I do not own any matte box, not indifocus, cinevate, indian, or what have you. The matte box I used to work with was a cavision one. I have no interests invested in any company for whatever reason, so there is no need to attack me. I am all for the indian matte box and adapter company going belly up.

All I was trying to say is:
It sounds like you have not used or owned either the indifocus or the cinevate matte box, to clearly say (paraphrasing) "they were manufactured by that indian company that stole Vocas' design" is a dangerous game to play. There might be people that believe you and two other companies (like Vocas) may get hurt. Unless you have proof that's what those are you shouldn't bring other people's reputations down. All I said what that indifocus and cinevate should weigh in on it that way their names aren't needlessly sullied in relation to some indian knockoff company they may have nothing to do with.
 
Last edited:
Back to topic, anybody know what the hold up on the IndiMatte is? Tim was slated for a January 15th release/ship date.

Looks like these matte boxes are hell and a half for companies like RR and IndiSYSTEM to actually get them on the market.
 
ecking said:
I'm aware of that, what I meant are they can leave a huge negative stigma on people's mind if they take your opinion as the gospel truth.

[/B]
Click to expand...

I didn't mean to attack you. I get a little passionate about intellectual property theft. If I came across a little personal, my apologies. I saw the pictures and said, "Jesus, is this another Vocas knock off?". In my fervor, much of my responses were directed to another post (frank's) which I failed to distinguish.

I agree Kia and HYundais are similar but not identical. But in the case of the great matte box caper, except color and materials, they're almost identical. I don't know if Brevis or Indi outsource their matteboxes. It's a strong suspicion as they look like the Indian knock offs to the tee. Then again it could be just coincidence.

Matte box designs are patentable as much as an Eames chair was for chair design. Vocas definitely has patents on their mattebox design. Nowhere in knock off land is a license mentioned.

Eitherway, I'm done with this thread. All I ask is that people examine what they purchase beyond price.
 
Last edited:
Tim Naylor said:
Vocas definitely has patents on their mattebox design. Nowhere in knock off land is a license mentioned.
Click to expand...

I talked to Vocas an apparently the only patented part of their design are the shutters inside the mattebox. There isn't much they can do about this they told me...
 
trudd said:
Back to topic, anybody know what the hold up on the IndiMatte is? Tim was slated for a January 15th release/ship date.

Looks like these matte boxes are hell and a half for companies like RR and IndiSYSTEM to actually get them on the market.
Click to expand...

It looks like indifocus offers a lot stuff but doesn't update their site often to reflect that, I guess the best way to get new stuff is to email Tim directly.
 
He told me via email last week that he intended to update the website today - I think the release of the indiMATTE is imminent. He is also trying to release another new product, and it seems like more and more people are jumping on the indiFOCUS bandwagon, so that's probably what's holding him up. He is just one guy, after all.
 
herbalmedia said:
He told me via email last week that he intended to update the website today - I think the release of the indiMATTE is imminent. He is also trying to release another new product, and it seems like more and more people are jumping on the indiFOCUS bandwagon, so that's probably what's holding him up. He is just one guy, after all.
Click to expand...

So are you saying IndiFocus is just one guy doing all the work? That's a lot of work, I bet.
 
Tim's been down for three days with electrical issues in his shop. Seems someone (electrician) wired in new circuits at 10amp instead of the ones he asked for (20 and 30amp). Hard to run those machines on a ten amp circuit.
 
man, any updates? i want me a mattebox and i dont know what ot chose, but this seems like the best value considering the features.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top