It could cause many sales of the TBTech option too. "so close to Pro-Q3 they sued us".

 

The design itself is not the hardest part. The implementation of the design in software is the challenging part. It's not like Copy-pasting a file, and you're done. It takes months to implement such software, and you can't sue someone else for that.

 

They deserve to be tried in The Hague. Not for copying FabFilter's UI design, but for convincing impressionable buyers that they want to sift through all those filter slopes on a right click.

 

Imagine the disaster if the big brands like Neve, SSL, API started suing software devs because the design of the knobs, for example. It's so silly

 

Bro, you high?

 

1 - TBTech is objectively copying FF's design;
2 - FF plugins have a rather particular and noticeable design;
3 - Even if FF could sue TBTech, I have the impression that FF simply doesn't feel like doing that, probably because it feels confident enough in its products to understand that it doesn't have to sue another company;
4 - Regarding your question, I disagree with the idea that we need more laws. We don't even have efficient and fair copyright protection laws to begin with, lol.

 

Neve/SSL actually "tried" that with Kiive's Nfuse (they complied before anything happened). They had to change the entire thing.

 

I think it was only the knob colour on the Neve side as it was too similar to the Master Bus Transformer hardware. The SSL Fusion side stayed the same?

Empirical Labs also demanded changes to Kiive's Xtressor, as the knobs and name were too similar to the Distressor. It's now the XTcomp.

 

FabFilter has a lot of nerve in suing TBTECH for plagerism after FabFilter, and I quote, compared their Pro-C 2 GUI the following way in an ad in the April 2022 edition of Mix magazine without any credit whatsoever to the original dude who wrote it.

Shall I compare thee to a summer’s day?
Thou art more lovely and more temperate.
Rough winds do shake the darling buds of May,
And summer’s lease hath all too short a date.
Sometime too hot the eye of heaven shines,
And often is his gold complexion dimmed;
And every fair from fair sometime declines,
By chance, or nature’s changing course, untrimmed;
But thy eternal summer shall not fade,
Nor lose possession of that fair thou ow’st,
Nor shall death brag thou wand’rest in his shade,
When in eternal lines to Time thou grow’st.
So long as men can breathe, or eyes can see,
So long lives this, and this gives life to thee....

 

And often is his gold compression dimmed;

 

Yeah, the Pythagoras estate should sue all the mathematicians, universities, schools, teachers for violating his rights in his own intellectual properties. Millions of school kids would thank them. ))))))) Or look at Einstein's IP: the CEOs of the LHC should pay their a$$ses of ... The inventor of 4-cornered-paper didn't get paid too from all the writers ...

 

On topic: it doesn't seem that the appearing of TBTech brought Fabfilter less fame. Does the GUI looks like a ripoff? Yeah, for sure. Does it hurt Fabfilter? Probably not. There is even a likelihood it caused some free advertisement for them. Just look at the trillions of Fabfilter-Fanboys comparing and complaining. As a comparison, take a look at Fender Stratocasters or Ibanez Tubescreamers. Two of the most cloned things in the guitar world. Does is hurt the companies? My local music store is BLOATED with Fender Stratocasters from the original brand. I believe all the copies had even playing their role in this success story.

I've seen so many negative comments about TBTech around the internet. Some of them sound somehow alarming to me.

Off topic: I completely switched my go-to preference regarding a graphical eq from Q3 to Kirchhoff. I remember the change as a weird episode of me learning how to mix. It took me almost a week comparing the two plugins, ending up liking the results I got with Kirchhoff every time, but could'nt believe it. I was worried about being biased by some bold marketing quotes. Plus all those negative comments made me insecure in my choice process. In the end I was like "f... it, I just use what I like more". I never used Plugindoctor and have no ambitions to do so in the future. Sometimes I find some interest in somebody showing things in Plugindoctor, but I don't want it to be part of my choice process regarding audio.

In my comparisons their was a subtle difference in sound processing (if only my head played tricks on me, well, kudos to TBTech and their mindwashing). Most obvious to me the difference was when low-cutting. Later I found out there is a setting called "use tight mode" which is on in default mode. Maybe it is that. The other difference was, that I could not get away the impression, I could hear more of what the EQ was doing. I switched completely, mainly because my impressions did not change at all over the time. Using one or another of out the those EQs is not what makes a better or worse producer out of you anyway. I'm still a bit curious about this specific case. Maybe the huge UI similarities plays a role in this, but I believe it should'nt, at least for me. It is a bit weird how samey the interfaces are, but on the other hand, why force to change a working concept?

 

Does FabFilter have a patent? Yes, they have filed a patent for their spectral analyzer.
You can read it here: https://portal.unifiedpatents.com/patents/patent/US-9530396-B2

From the patent website, I quote:

US-9530396-B2 - Visually-assisted Mixing of Audio Using a Spectral Analyzer

Processor-implemented methods and systems for visually-assisted mixing of audio using a spectral analyzer are disclosed. The system calculates and displays a spectral view for each track in an arrangement in a multi-track view. A user can then request modification of the spectral view. In response to this request for modification, the system automatically adjusts associated mixing parameters for the modified track so that the spectral output of the track substantially matches the user-requested modified spectral view. This allows a user to visually mix an arrangement by imputing a desired spectral result and having the program make the changes necessary to achieve it.

 

There are so many ways to look at this in what is left of the music industry.
Positively - copying is the greatest form of flattery. It means they have something that is worth copying.
Negatively - musically, in software and almost any product, suing anyone for intellectual property infringement is neither a simple or fun process and it takes a lot of time and resources. These days people do what is evident everywhere, if they can get away with it they'll do it. Incredibly sad, but true.

 

It's hard to copyright an eq and a frequency graph.

 

To me it doesn't help that those suing cases often pretend, they are fought mainly because of moral issues, which seem more like a wrapper for the real intention: money. If it is not about money, why not focus on the flattery aspect?

 

I have it on good authority from the man himself. The DJ Swivel team did approach FabFilter first to ask them to make a Channel Strip. It's only because they refused that the aforementioned company proceeded to do so!

 

It is already patented, please read:

 

The knobs of TBTECH plugins looks infinitely better.
FabFilter plugins looks like toys because of their knobs. They was designed and are intended for children.



Really? Are they serious?

 

Every lawsuit is based on the laws of the respective country. For example, if you have worked on your software for 3 years, eight hours a day, and then patented it at the patent office, you certainly won't stand by and watch as the competition snatches your idea and possibly customers away from you.

I don't make any money from my invention, but I'm flattered...! People need cash... you can't buy anything with flattery. When they buy something they are saying that it is a good product and that it will improve their life!

The world is full of fraud, some people steal and copy your products and turn them into money, which is not even taxed, and therefore also constitutes a criminal offense of tax evasion. That's why we have customs and law enforcement.Only a few people have good ideas and work hard to implement them. Why shouldn't the hard-working creative people be adequately rewarded for it?

Imagine you work for years on a sound library that is then pirated for free the day after it is released...! Well, you're smart and you know beforehand that your stuff will be cracked. And you have to be pretty good to get your product bought by people who value it and then transfer cash to your account.