Talk:Leica copy

From Camera-wiki.org
Revision as of 18:24, 29 February 2012 by Fragarach (talk | contribs) (How should the "Leica copy" term be used?)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search
This is the discussion page for Leica copy. Click here to start a new topic.


Discussion pages are for discussing improvements to the article itself, not for discussions about the subject of the article.


Use of "Leica copy"

Is there an "official" Camera-Wiki rule as for when to use the term "Leica copy"? I have seen many pages that state that a given camera is a Leica copy while it really is an original design. Copy is a very strong term indeed, and implies stealing intellectual property, manufacturing processes and things like reverse engineering (e.g. Fed-1).

In my opinion, a camera like the Fed-1 is truly a Leica copy, whereas a Canon-P (for example) is an original design, and therefore not a copy.

I also very strongly disagree with the fact that "twin" cameras can be called copies of one another. Twin cameras generally result from joint ventures, therefore calling one half of the twin camera a copy is a nonsense.

Anyway, these is just my point of view, I'm just trying to open a discussion here. --Fragarach 10:24, 29 February 2012 (PST)