Oh come on. If the design is being made by the "fourth generation" of Kelly, then it must be past the patent term. By your logic, no one should be making touchscreen devices aside from Palm, all GUIs should be branded Xerox, all lightbulbs made by Edison, and all cars made by Mercedes. It's absurd to think that something so simple should only be made by one company. If the people on kickstarter found it viable, and it's not violating any patents, that's really all that matters.

And frankly, Scott Wilson wasn't the first person to think of ipod watches, he just made some pretty pictures.

from a design point of view, I don't see the point of it. As far as I can tell the only ways to make 'valid' variations on the original are to change the material or form in a way that better fits the priorities of users e.g. better thermal transfer vs outer surface heat loss to get a faster boil, or form that is better to pack somehow. Surely a more squat forrm will have less stack effect, less thermal transfer from the fire to the water?

whether there is a patent on it or not:
by just making it a bit smaller, it still screams "knock-off"!

As stated, this is hardly a new design. I don't see how this is a knock-off, there seem to have been some effort in order to design this product and not just copy mesure for mesure some other product. As stated this is a concept that was used only by the kelly bottle, as stated in the comments go see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samovar too.

I really don't see your point. As if no designer should be making a product that has already been made and only work on 100% original ideas? Designing chairs you can sit on, shoes for your feet is bad? They look more different to each other than most traditional cold water bottles do.

Would I back this product on kickstarter? No, I don't think it brings anything new to the market, which is why I would primarily back something on kickstarter (mind you it does look better). But would I call this unethical or illegal, absolutely not!

The capitalist in me says: We'll see if the market agrees with the need for this.

Maybe there is something in this which the Kelly Kettle doesn't have. Maybe it's the insulating sleeve he puts on some of the units. Maybe it is the smaller form factor and weight. Maybe it's just the community the guy has on the backpacking forum he's on.

Why does it matter if the "original" company is iterating or experimenting with a new design of an old product? Why can't it be done by a third party? Is there really something bad about improvements or derivative works?

The part of me who's read too many business books would say that the Kelly Kettle company needs to innovate, face this competition (certainly better advertising on their part couldn't hurt), or just accept it (maybe the market is big enough for all the manufacturers).

This is too close for comfort; it may be legal, but it is still a knock-off. Credit should be given where credit is due.

Mark H - I've combined your comments into one. (No HTML, but it's WYSIWYG) Thanks.

Is the Kelly design original or unique? Did the samovar pre-exist? As noted, if Kelly was patentable (dubious, given the samovar), that patent should have expired long since.

Ouch guys. The Kelly Kettle is just one brand of the chimney kettles that I rightly say have been around for a long time. There's also the "Storm Kettle," the "Sirram," the Thermette (several several others), and the unbranded Samovars that have been around for a really long time.

So there were a ton. But none were small and light enough to practically carry around with you. I made one that was on my back porch, and it is less than half the size and weight of anything that came before it thanks to a lot of hard work and creative design on my part.

I gave credit where credit was due, but Kelly doesn't own (and didn't create) the idea of the chimney kettle. I wish you all had done more research before throwing a new designer under the bus.

-Devin Montgomery

Creator of the Backcountry Boiler

Core77 - Poor Research, Poor post, not up the the usual standards of your excellent blog.
Everything is a re-mix - products, music, movies and we stand on the shoulders of giants.
http://vimeo.com/19447662 - I'm guessing you like Star Wars - but you would hardly accuse George Lucus of being a hack!

Devin Montgomery-Well said and good luck with the project.

i have to admit when i first saw it, i wondered how/why it was on kickstarter. that said, the market can and will decide if it's sufficiently different or improved. i wish devin luck.

Frankly, in the context of all the articles posted today, among them "The PDG Provides a Dick-Free Design Collaboration Space in Three Cities," this article is really ironic.

As has been mentioned to death, chimney kettles are not the exclusive domain of the Kelly family. This is an extreme old concept. Plus, this design is aimed at a whole different market segment - backpackers, not homesteaders and survivalists.

It's one thing to take a very complicated and detailed design and make a design that's similar in every which way. That could well be called a knockoff. Copying the style and structure of a UI - from layout down to iconography - could make for a knockoff. A clone of the Mona Lisa at some flea market would be a knockoff. Slapping Apple's branding onto a cheap plastic phone with a distinct silver rim would be a knockoff. A design student without ideas for a project, choosing to rehash a concept he found online would be guilty of making a knockoff.

But for crying out loud, when you have a design as simple as a burner, a chimney, a water chamber, and a stopper, you just can't call it a knockoff unless it's a total spitting image of another product. Otherwise, *every* maker of practically *any* establish type of product is an unoriginal thief, unless he'd ladle on so much needless crap that the initial appeal of the object would be lost - and even then it'd be iffy.

By such a standard, if I were to design a pencil, there would be no originality if I played with materials, or ergonomics, or color; oh no, it would have to brush my teeth, feed my cat, pedal my bike, and do all my sketching for me in order for it to not be a knockoff. But then, it wouldn't be a pencil anymore, would it? "Pencil" would just be a feature of this hypothetical product.

At what point would you be satisfied with Devin Montgomery's design? Would you be okay with it if the kettle portion were detachable, or if he came up with a way to increase the surface area inside the chimney for greater efficiency? Would you be okay with it if it would be available in a range of Pantone colors with pretty little patterns laser-cut into the burner section? Would you be okay with it if he welded a bundt cake mold from Target to a buddy burner he stole from a hobo, wrote some artsy-fartsy tripe about society's waste and excess, and sold it to some rich poseur for $200?

At what point would you be satisfied with a design that derives from an entire general *category* of products?

How about this, Hipstomp: buy one of these Backcountry Boilers, and buy a Kelly Kettle. Do a comparative review on Core77, and then tell us whether or not you think it's a knockoff. After this scathing (and frankly, rather brash) article, Mr. Montgomery deserves that much. If after that, you still believe that it's knockoff, then fine - it would at least be an informed and tested opinion, with your thoughts and conclusions clearly laid out for others to consider for themselves.

Not being a user of the kettles, I can't compare one to the other directly. But, to say that there is something sacred about the Kelly Kettle and that any improvement or redisign is a target for "knockoff" accusations would kinda' defeat the whole purpose of this whole website. It makes me wonder what the detractors would be doing on a site like this.

hi, for those who haven't done your research, he has documented his kettle making journey over at http://www.backpackinglight.com/cgi-bin/backpackinglight/forums/thread_display.html?forum_thread_id=7456&startat=20

go read the whole forum and see their discussions on the 'available in the market' boilers and why devin worked at a lighter version, and how a few brands are in fact made by the same metal spinning company. and see how he picked up metal spinning in the face of expensive commercial metal spinning costs.

Having owned an original Kelly Kettle (small version) for some time I would like to add to the discussion. The KK does not work for backpacking/hiking trips--too large and too heavy. Devin's version solves both problems and adds an insulated jacket. His BCB is something the lightweight hiking community needs and until now, has not been available.

As a KK owner i can tell you the best feature is the tall handle and the chain that allows you to precisely pour some very hot water from a very hot and dirty pot. The BackAlley Broiler doesnt have this, it doesnt even have a spout. I would like to see how well that jacket stands up to soot and flames from the times you put the top on and a stick is in the way. Knock off and a poor design too