Ask HN: When is it ok to copy/steal an idea?
More accurately: What's the difference between "stealing" an idea, and seizing an opportunity to "do it better"?
I find myself often shooting down ideas for websites/projects that I'd like to pursue, because "someone already did that" or I feel I would be stealing/copying the idea in some unethical fashion.
Is it unethical to see a poorly implemented but good idea and run with it? Where's the line between "wow they did this better" and "wow these hacks totally stole that"?
15 comments
[ 18.0 ms ] story [ 161 ms ] threadSo one line would be: if the idea isn't patented, or it is, but you don't think the patent is valid, and have the money to back up your claim, or just feel ornery, then go for it.
People replicate functionality all the time. Why should that be unethical? I wouldn't just replicate it for no good reason. A good reason, and one that the spirit of the law is supposed to support, is, does it provide new value to the customer? Coincidentally, that is the same question you should be asking yourself if you plan to take your work to market.
Side note: if you come up with an idea and only -then- see it has already been done, I wouldn't even consider it copying.
If you wanted to start a car company, would you be concerned about "stealing ideas" because there were already other makes of cars on the market?
Is this model of scenarios more or less correct?:
1 copy a mousetrap design: bad ------- ethical/unethical line ------- 2 build your own mousetrap (even if there's really nothing "new" about it), but market it better or present it differently: pretty good 3 build a better mousetrap: really good 4 invent a whole new way to trap mice: awesome, not likely
2 and 3 are probably where the majority of successful business ventures fall. Most 4's probably started as 2 or 3.
You place the ethical/unethical line where you feel it should go; personally I don't see anything wrong with copying designs. I have a few wealthy neighbors. Know how they made their money? Everyday, boring easily copied stuff like car washes, rental real estate or owning a couple of fast food joints. Even the people I know who got rich from technology businesses were doing fairly pedestrian stuff like industrial instrumentation that's been around since the 50's.
I'm sure I'd end up doing many little things differently than you, and maybe even a few bigger things, but I'd love to hear your thoughts on this example.
I've been involved in a few tiny ventures (only me, or at most one other person) and one thing they've all had in common is that none of them were unique except in the personal approach I took to them.
So, as an example, you could start a business producing readers for diesel fuel flowmeters as I did, but would you have the same approach to customer service as me? Would you go out of your way to make using the unit as easy for your customer to use as you could?
The employee scheduler is the first software-only project I've ever done (and it was started primarily to learn web development), so maybe my reaction to being cloned would be different. But in the past I've built and sold hardware devices that had plenty of cheap marketplace competition so I'm used to that. My approach was to not care how many people were building the same thing or how much less they charged, but to focus instead on how happy I could make my customers.
I think of the product as a means to an end. The desired end result is profit and happy customers. The product or service is just the route you take to get there and really not that important in itself.
If ideas were even half as regulated as the patent system, then the world would be a miserable and stagnant place.