Recent court developments in Germany have put an important issue into the robotics spotlight.
A German court in Hamburg has issued a preliminary injunction against Elite Robots Germany in a copyright infringement case involving copying of Universal Robots software.
As a result, the company is not allowed to offer or distribute the products covered by the decision in Germany while the case continues.
At first, this may sound like technical legal news only relevant for the German market.
But it highlights broader questions that matter to every company investing in automation – especially when choosing a collaborative robot that will operate close to people and become part of daily production.
Here are five reasons why.
1. Copying creates real risk for customers
When protected robot software or design is copied without permission, the impact extends well beyond the supplier and exposes all parties in the value chain to significant legal risk.
It can affect end-customers directly as using an infringing product for commercial purposes, such as a robot with infringing software in a production line, can itself constitute a legal violation.
This not only creates a risk of court-ordered remedies, including preliminary or permanent injunctions requiring the immediate shutdown and removal of the affected robots, but also exposes customers to costly and disruptive litigation and potential business interruption.
Automation systems are long‑term investments meant to run for years. Legal uncertainty at supplier level can turn into a real business risk on the factory floor.
2. “Similar” does not mean safe
Collaborative industrial robots are often described as safe, but safety is not automatic. It depends on how a robot is designed, tested, and used in real applications.
A robot that looks or behaves like another system does not share its safety profile. Safety comes from reliable hardware, validated software, certified functions, clear limits, and proper documentation. These cannot be copied by appearance alone.
Superficial similarity creates a dangerous false sense of security, which may result in serious physical injury to operators and bystanders.
3. Lower price can mean higher cost later
The purchase price of a robot is easy to compare. The long‑term cost is not.
If your robot vendor ends up in a legal battle, besides the question of even being able to use it legally, you also face uncertainty about product availability, software updates and service support.
Unexpected downtime, lack of updates or compliance challenges can quickly outweigh any initial savings. This has never been more relevant as modern robots are software‑driven machines. Motion control, force limits, diagnostics, and safety logic all depend on software.
If customers do not know where the software comes from, who owns it, or how it is maintained, they introduce uncertainty into production. Original, well‑understood software is essential for reliable and predictable operation over time.
In automation, shortcuts often appear affordable at first but expensive later. And as with all things in life: if it seems too good to be true, it probably is.
4. Buying copycat tech shapes the future of automation
Every automation investment sends a signal about what the market rewards. Choosing original, lawfully developed technology encourages long‑term engineering, robust safety practices, and continued product improvement. Choosing copycat technology does the opposite: it normalizes shortcuts, weakens incentives to invest in research and compliance, and shifts competition away from quality and reliability.
Over time, widespread tolerance of intellectual property infringement affects the entire robotics ecosystem, from suppliers and integrators to suppliers and regulators. It increases uncertainty and ultimately makes it harder for manufacturers to rely on stable platforms that will be supported and improved for years to come.
Protecting original technology is not about limiting choice or slowing competition. It is about ensuring that competition is based on real innovation, verified safety, and accountability – and that customers can invest in automation with confidence, knowing the technology they rely on is built to last.
5. Trust in the original
In summary, choosing a robot is not only about specifications and price. It is about trust.
Buyers need confidence that a robot is legally sound, properly certified, and supported by people who truly understand the technology. Trust comes from transparency, responsibility, and deep technical knowledge – not from claims or visual similarity.
Automation is becoming increasingly central to modern manufacturing and as it does, questions of originality, safety, and integrity become part of responsible decision‑making.
So, no matter if you’re purchasing your first robots or expanding your fleet, before asking what a robot can do, it is worth asking a simple question:
Do you trust where it comes from?
This article was produced as part of TechRadar Pro Perspectives, our channel to feature the best and brightest minds in the technology industry today.
The views expressed here are those of the author and are not necessarily those of TechRadarPro or Future plc. If you are interested in contributing find out more here: https://www.techradar.com/pro/perspectives-how-to-submit
via Hosting & Support
Comments
Post a Comment