
(via Threadless)
A conversation in office on an unrelated topic led me to ask this question on Twitter.
A conversation made me think – are we more ok with business ideas/models being aped compared to creative ideas? If so, why?
β manu prasad (@manuscrypts) April 15, 2013
..and @atulkarmakar gave me his perspectives
@atulkarmarkar exactly, why the different rules?
β manu prasad (@manuscrypts) April 15, 2013
@atulkarmarkar hmm, that does not apply to ads no?
β manu prasad (@manuscrypts) April 15, 2013
@atulkarmarkar in fact ads is what made me think of it in the first place π
β manu prasad (@manuscrypts) April 15, 2013
Just like Atul mentioned, I had first considered whether it was because creative ideas were considered more personal Β and a business idea/model an impersonal, corporate entity. But my starting point had been advertising, to which this does not really apply. Compare the reactions of Company A replicating Company B’s business model/idea versus them being ‘inspired’ by their advertising. In the case of advertising, both agencies might get paid and both clients might benefit. But in the case of a business, the second player could benefit from the mistakes (strategy/execution) of the pioneer and build a more successful business. That would be really unfair to the first guy whose business idea might have been a really creative solution to some need. And yet, it’s more likely that the aping of ads would spark a larger debate and the business cloning would be ignored. Am I missing something? Any perspectives you want to share?
until next time, game of clones

Leave a Reply to manuscrypts Cancel reply