All the parts you referred to are generic and obvious - stuffing the latest processor or more RAM in a phone is easy. They're not innovative and they're not the parts that HTC are promoting in their marketing material. The HTC One is a cheap knock-off because the headline parts are the OIS camera which has been proven to be significantly inferior to the camera in the L920 and the HAAC microphones which debuted in the L920.
I don't understand how you can dismiss the unique design, CPU, display, RAM, GPU, battery, UI and weight, yet make a distinction for the microphone and camera. Does anybody really buy a phone for the microphone? And while the Lumia 920 has a great camera, so too does the HTC One - this comparison
shows the Lumia 920 excelling in some areas and the HTC One excelling in others. Even if we accept your premise that the Lumia 920 has a significantly better camera—and I think overall it is
a better camera, though I wouldn't say "significantly"
so—that isn't grounds to dismiss the HTC One as a "cheap knock-off". The term "knock-off" means "a copy that sells for less than the original"
, which clearly
doesn't apply here as it is a) more expensive, b) stylistically distinct (therefore not a copy), and c) technically superior in most areas. What you said is objectively, factually wrong.
There are legitimate reasons to criticise the HTC One—and indeed the company in general—but you seem to have let your personal preference for Nokia stand in the way of reason and objectivity. What we have here is a minor dispute over the microphone used, which seems to be a result of manufacturers in the supply chain rather than HTC itself (if indeed the claim has validity). For what it's worth I think Nokia is the more innovative company, though the restrictions imposed by Windows Phone certainly aren't helping it compete.