Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/07/29
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]At 03:13 PM 7/29/99 -0700, Peter Kotsinadelis wrote: > >Everybody copies everybody else. Zeiss did used Taylor's triplet design to >conceive their Tessar and also the early work of Goerz (Dagor). The Protar >(originally called the Anastigmat) used the design of H. Schroeder's >Concentric lens (1888 made by Ross in England) combined with Dallmeyer's >Rapid Rectinlinear design. Peter You have the late Dr Kingslake spinning rapidly in his final resting place. Please read his books, where he discusses the history of the Tessar designs. What you are discussing is the evolution of one design in the hands of a competent optical scientist. Rudolph DID work from the designs of others, but he improved upon them through his own genius in formulating the Tessar. What the Japanese did was to make EXACT copies -- that is, they took a given Zeiss or Leitz lens, disassembled it, and made an exact copy. No new science, no new engineering, just blind and bloody theft. Precisely of the sort that Voigtlander had used when they stole the Petzval design. The Japanese optical industry was quite vibrant, of course, and within a decade had evolved these designs into new shapes. But they didn't pay, then or later, one red cent to either Zeiss or Leitz for the free use they made of their designs. These lenses were all protected by patent rights, as were the camera designs and the lens mount designs and the rangefinder designs and so forth. Didn't matter to the Japanese: they just stole away, happy as bloody moonshiners at a hot mash party, delighting in the knowledge that the Allied Control Commission had ruled that German companies could not protect their patent rights in Japan. Period. Allow me to draw a parallel of more than passing interest to some on the LUG. We have actively discussed here over the life of this forum the copyright protection which ought to be afforded photographs taken by professional photographers. Well, the situation in Japan from 1945 to 1954 was as if the Japanese had been allowed to print copyrighted pictures made by, say, Stieglitz or Adams or Bresson and sell them in the world market without paying royalties. Now, that would bring shock and horror to many LUG'ers. And the patents of Zeiss and Leitz were as much theirs as the photographs of Adams were his. Thievery is thievery. We call successful crooks, "sir", and respect them for their craftiness. And, for their thieveries, I respect Voigtlander and Nikon and Canon. But I don't have to approve of the thefts themselves. And I do not. Marc msmall@roanoke.infi.net FAX: +540/343-7315 Cha robh bas fir gun ghras fir!