"Clones" are actually the REAL THING

[edyle]

Original owners are saying that clone buyers are complicit with China in stealing from the original designers. Yet the Nemesis, Chi you and the King, which are supposed to be "original designs", are stealing their images that they engrave on these mechs. Original owners still purchase these designs knowing this fact. So how is an original designer doing anything different than China? And, how are original owners/buyers doing anything different than what clone buyers are doing?

I would also submit that it's the original buyers that were lied to by the designers (Atmomixani, Mojo and Surefire), as it's
obvious that their products aren't completely original and obviously infringe on the intellectual property of others. And yet knowing this, they keep buying these products?

But clone buyers are bad people. Great logic.

What images are Nemesis, Chiyou and King stealing? Are you talking about TRADEMARKS?
Because if that is what you are talking about, "stealing their images" is an obfuscation. If they are putting someone else's brand on the product, it is COUNTERFEIT, it is FRAUD. It is not "stealing their images". When you print up a greenback you are not "stealing Benjamin Franklin's image" you're making a counterfiet dollar.

I should give up; all this other stuff about companies Atmo Mojo and Surefire, I get the impression this is just a continuation of some other debate about a specific activity and since I do not know what is really behind that discussion I can't follow what is being said.

I am guessing for example that Atmo Mojo and Surefire are companies that make clones ???

 

[Richard75]

Why put the logos and serials on them then?

They used to make "inspired by" mods like the sigelei pick-a-number, now they make actual clones with the logos. It's either that or so people can fulfill some strange fetish of owning counterfeit stuff.

It's hilarious that people on here think it's silly that people who create things don't want others to steal their work and produce it.

I really don't have much of a problem with the "inspired by" mods. My first (and favorite) mod was an aluminum Galileo. When I saw sigelei #9, which is the Galileo design but made in stainless steel (with a built in 510), I thought it was awesome. I now own an authentic stainless Galileo (and I want to order one or two more), because I'd rather support Yasu than Sigelei. But if you research the mod, very few pages reference the real Galileo, nor did Sigelei name it such, and they didn't put the original logo on it. I don't really have a problem with that.

Truthfully, I don't think the counterfeits are meant to deceive (the vendors might, but I don't think the manufacturer has this intention). But it's still a counterfeit. Legality aside, it's unethical to fake someone else's work. Saying the mod makers are asking for it is absurd. If you own a counterfeit Chi_You, and you're reasoning is "well screw Mojo, they can't keep up and they charge too much", you are disrespecting and cheating the folks who invented the design of what you own! It's completely back asswards.

 

[Dannyboy5691]

Why put the logos and serials on them then?

They used to make "inspired by" mods like the sigelei pick-a-number, now they make actual clones with the logos. It's either that or so people can fulfill some strange fetish of owning counterfeit stuff.

It's hilarious that people on here think it's silly that people who create things don't want others to steal their work and produce it.

And I think it's hilarious that original owners slam China for doing exactly what the original designers have done and are still doing. As I've said before, the images on the the Nemesis, Chi You and King mechs are not owned by the designers. This is a fact that can easily be found through a little searching. So, given that you're so against the theft of others property you must be in agreement that Atmomixani, Mojo and Surefire are in fact the same theives that you have portrayed China to be. And if that's the case, I'm sure you'll have no problem in disposing of these mechs and strenuously encouraging other owners to do the same.

Bottom line is that you can't have it both ways. If customers are wrong for buying a clone, then customers are wrong for buying an original.

Ah logic! Don't you just love it?

 

[dam718]

Afaik, the Provari is made in house and the ELA by Super T. Do you have information of other american mechs that are made in the USA? Because if they're not then they're not providing any jobs. I also find it interesting that the Provari or the ELA haven't been cloned yet. But the Nemesis, Chi You, King and others have. The Provari is highly popular and the ELA is well known. Surely China must know about both of these mods.

It's my belief that the work for many mods is subbed out to China. This is why China can copy these mods so well. Do you really believe that someone in China is going to the trouble of waiting to buy the mods that have been cloned?

I do believe the Smoktech ZMax (with the segmented LED screen) was intended to be a "clone" of the ProVari. They didn't do a very good job of it, especially with the electronics... This is what seperates the mods that are build "in the likeness of" and the mods that are built with the intent of replicating every aspect of the original.

I do understand what you are saying with respect to the images used on the Nemesis/Chi_You/King... That makes sense... So how do you explain the Kayfun clone which is not just using the image, but the brand name SvoeMesto? Of the Ithaka which is using the Golden Greek logo? Or the new Caravela clone with the sailboats, Caravela "C" logo, and Caravela branding all engraved into it?

It may not be "Illegal" because these gems are made by one man companies who don't have the capital to file for a patent, or register a trademark, or worse yet they don't know how. Does that mean they shouldn't be offered some respect?

Maybe I'm just an old prude... If I made something, and someone else bold faced copied it, I would want some royalties from the sales of the copy... Remove all the images... It's still a copy of everything else that went into the design and manufacture of the original product. This isn't a foreign concept... Plenty of companies are out there making copies of someone elses work, and paying royalties and licensing fees to do it. Ethical business practices... This artwork you are speaking of may be public domain, and if that is the case, you can put it on anything you want... Like advertising with free clip art...

 

[Richard75]

And I think it's hilarious that original owners slam China for doing exactly what the original designers have done and are still doing. As I've said before, the images on the the Nemesis, Chi You and King mechs are not owned by the designers. This is a fact that can easily be found through a little searching. So, given that you're so against the theft of others property you must be in agreement that Atmomixani, Mojo and Surefire are in fact the same theives that you have portrayed China to be. And if that's the case, I'm sure you'll have no problem in disposing of these mechs and strenuously encouraging other owners to do the same.

Bottom line is that you can't have it both ways. If customers are wrong for buying a clone, then customers are wrong for buying an original.

Ah logic! Don't you just love it?

I just gotta say, the stolen image argument doesn't hold much water... that's like saying an unauthorized poster (or just the image printed on whatever: watch, hat, t-shirt, you pick) of Dali's "Persistence of Memory" (the melting clocks) is equivalent to a counterfeit painting of the original. They're both wrong in their own way, but clearly there is a difference in fraudulence.

Now that's logic for you. And yes, I do love it.

 

[glassgal]

And I think it's hilarious that original owners slam China for doing exactly what the original designers have done and are still doing. As I've said before, the images on the the Nemesis, Chi You and King mechs are not owned by the designers. This is a fact that can easily be found through a little searching. So, given that you're so against the theft of others property you must be in agreement that Atmomixani, Mojo and Surefire are in fact the same theives that you have portrayed China to be. And if that's the case, I'm sure you'll have no problem in disposing of these mechs and strenuously encouraging other owners to do the same.

Bottom line is that you can't have it both ways. If customers are wrong for buying a clone, then customers are wrong for buying an original.

Ah logic! Don't you just love it?

You keep saying the original makers of those mods' stole' their logos... why do you say that? How do you know that they didn't license those originals from their artists? Because copyright is a whole lot easier to obtain than either trademark or patent, and the artists could sue over copyright of their drawings comparatively easily. What you are spreading, at least 3x that I've counted on this thread alone, is slander against those companies if it's not true. And those companies can take legal action against you.

So you must have real strong evidence of this. How do you know those companies stole those logos, since you keep telling us they do/did by name?

 

[Jayvaps]

I just gotta say, the stolen image argument doesn't hold much water... that's like saying an unauthorized poster (or just the image printed on whatever: watch, hat, t-shirt, you pick) of Dali's "Persistence of Memory" (the melting clocks) is equivalent to a counterfeit painting of the original. They're both wrong in their own way, but clearly there is a difference in fraudulence.

Now that's logic for you. And yes, I do love it.

Actually, in the case of the nemesis, it is a very appropriate comparison.

Anne Stokes, the original copyrighted artist of the image of death angel is still alive and still producing art, and still living off of the proceeds of that art. She is the original artist, and any use of her copyrighted image for profit of death angel would need to be licensed by her, or it is a violation of her copyright. death angel »

Thus, it is the exact same thing for someone to 'steal' the atmomixani 'logo' and place it on a product and profit off of it than for atmomixani to place it on their product unlicensed and profit off of it. It may not be a 'counterfeit' product, but it is still 'stealing' someone else's artwork and profiting off of it.

So if an owner of an original nemesis thinks someone is immoral for owning or buying a fake with a logo, because the logos are unlicensed and are thus supporting the 'theft' of an artists work, then they are just as immoral for owning or buying an original nemesis since the image is not licensed by atmomixani(as far as I can find out) and they are supporting the 'theft' of an artists work. apples and apples.

Although personally, I find this whole argument of morality when discussing a person purchasing a consumer product rather silly.

 

[albcig]

this thread just made me curious about this. how many of the originals have the R or the TM in their name or products?

 

[Rule62]

Just wondering...Does anyone know if Atmomixani is using the 'Death Angel' with permission of Anne Stokes? It seems like everyone is assuming they aren't. I have no idea. But maybe they are.

 

[KenD]

8

There are a lot of reviews of the "authentic" Innokin iTastes being sold at Fasttech about poor battery life or bad batteries.
...

It would not surprise me if the "authentic" itastes sold on Fasttech actually contained lower rated batteries.

Just saying, there's never been any substantiated evidence that the FT itaste products would be fakes. Personally I don't think they are. I only have the SVD but I have absolutely no indications of it being anything other than authentic, the detail put into everything from the packaging to the product itself is simply too good. Innokin mass produces, and probably doesn't have a stellar quality control. These are not top of the line products, though they are very, very good (in my opinion). I've read about problems in innokin gear bought from other vendors than FT as well. Could be that FT sells blemished or factory rejected devices, I don't know, my SVD has worked great.

As for clones, I think it's important to distinguish between counterfeits/fakes and devices that are made to be (very, very) similar to brand names. "Clone" seems to be used for both here. The former is obviously totally unacceptable. The other, I don't think so. Mech mods are, after all (don't bite my head off), simply battery tubes that have been decorated. There is little variation in function. As I see it, manufacturing a mech mad that is similar to a more expensive one is like manufacturing a Les Paul style guitar that isn't a Gibson. Ok as long as you don't claim it to be of the more expensive brand.

As to the OP's suggestion, I think that it's highly unlikely that (mech) mad designers sell their designs to cloners.

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk

 

[tartanraven]

Absolutely correct. And the fact that counterfeits are illegal to sell or import. Anyone that buys a clone knows that it's a clone and not the original. Some original owners are only concerned about their ego. It really is a blow to their self esteem when they hear about a $50 clone that is as good as their $200 original. And that's really sad when you let an inanimate object define who you are.

BINGO!! Ego and vanity are what supports the entire vaping industry in regards to hardware pricing. Every single piece of kit out there does ESSENTIALLY the same thing...they electronically vapourise a liquid that is to be inhaled. That being said, do remind me (and not to forget that we are discussing mechanical mods) exactly what is being done differently between an uncopyrighted expensive battery case, and a copy of said uncopyrighted battery case? I am not a fan of theft of design, but this is why protect things legally and/or physically right? What is the real source of the anger here? That some have already spent thousands on "original" designs, only to find out after the fact that they could have purchased a functionally and for the most part aesthetically identical device for pennies on the dollar? Caveat emptor? Nobody would pay $50 a stick for a Cuban cigar if it didn't identify itself via the ring.....otherwise it's just a cigar. Nobody ever gets up in the morning with a mad desire for caviar either!! In all three examples, it's about being SEEN, and bragging rights isn't it? Rampant consumerism only exists because of the consumer...and the manufacturer only exists to feed the demand.....what I'm saying here is simple....YOU made the monster, now it's your responsibility to keep it fed....or not.

 

[Camaroboi13]

Just wondering...Does anyone know if Atmomixani is using the 'Death Angel' with permission of Anne Stokes? It seems like everyone is assuming they aren't. I have no idea. But maybe they are.

On Atmomixani's website, I don't see anything that gives credit where credit is due for the images used on the battery tubes. Granted, I'm not going to spend all day trying to find it either lol

 

[edyle]

I really don't have much of a problem with the "inspired by" mods. My first (and favorite) mod was an aluminum Galileo. When I saw Sigelei #9, which is the Galileo design but made in stainless steel (with a built in 510), I thought it was awesome. I now own an authentic stainless Galileo (and I want to order one or two more), because I'd rather support Yasu than Sigelei. But if you research the mod, very few pages reference the real Galileo, nor did Sigelei name it such, and they didn't put the original logo on it. I don't really have a problem with that.

Truthfully, I don't think the counterfeits are meant to deceive (the vendors might, but I don't think the manufacturer has this intention). But it's still a counterfeit. Legality aside, it's unethical to fake someone else's work. Saying the mod makers are asking for it is absurd. If you own a counterfeit Chi_You, and you're reasoning is "well screw Mojo, they can't keep up and they charge too much", you are disrespecting and cheating the folks who invented the design of what you own! It's completely back asswards.

You seem to be contradicting yourself. It says above
"I don't think the counterfeits are meant to deceive"
"it's unethical to fake someone else's work"
so unless "fake" does not include deception, it sounds like a contradiction to me.

"If you own a counterfeit Chi_You, and you're reasoning is "well screw Mojo""
I'm getting the impression that a ChiYou is considered a fake Mojo!?? Is that what's going on here!!

 

[tribe]

I got a fake to compare to my real Nemesis. I have to say that they are very similar. The button on the fake is a little rough and the brass is probably not "naval".

Fortunately you can tell the real from the fake with a magnifying glass as we can see below.

My SS "real" nemesis was too shiny to get a good phone pic but you can tell too looking at the logo

REAL

FAKE

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[dam718]

Actually, in the case of the nemesis, it is a very appropriate comparison.

Anne Stokes, the original copyrighted artist of the image of death angel is still alive and still producing art, and still living off of the proceeds of that art. She is the original artist, and any use of her copyrighted image for profit of death angel would need to be licensed by her, or it is a violation of her copyright. death angel »

Thus, it is the exact same thing for someone to 'steal' the atmomixani 'logo' and place it on a product and profit off of it than for atmomixani to place it on their product unlicensed and profit off of it. It may not be a 'counterfeit' product, but it is still 'stealing' someone else's artwork and profiting off of it.

So if an owner of an original nemesis thinks someone is immoral for owning or buying a fake with a logo, because the logos are unlicensed and are thus supporting the 'theft' of an artists work, then they are just as immoral for owning or buying an original nemesis since the image is not licensed by atmomixani(as far as I can find out) and they are supporting the 'theft' of an artists work. apples and apples.

Although personally, I find this whole argument of morality when discussing a person purchasing a consumer product rather silly.

I'd say that's between Atmomixani and Anne Stokes... If you think that Atmomixani is violating a law, why don't you send Ms Stokes a letter letting her know that her work may be getting used without her permission? You may come to find out that Atmomixani does indeed have her blessing, and she is allowing them to use the image without a licensing fee at all. Or better yet, you may find out that Atmomixani is paying her licensing fees. Just because you can't find proof that they aren't over the internet doesn't automatically mean they are using the image without permission...

 

[dam718]

As I see it, manufacturing a mech mad that is similar to a more expensive one is like manufacturing a Les Paul style guitar that isn't a Gibson. Ok as long as you don't claim it to be of the more expensive brand.

I would look up Gibson's Lawsuit with Ibanez and Paul Reed Smith... Heck, PRS wasn't even a knock off, just a similar single cut design not even claiming to be anything like a Les Paul, and Gibson still sued them... Ibanez never claimed their axe was a Les Paul... Anyone these days who makes a guitar that looks similar to a Les Paul is paying Gibson to do it... Same with the ES335 - paying Gibson... Have a double cutaway with a bolt on neck you want to take to market? You'll be paying Fender to do it... Making spare parts (Warmoth for example), they are paying Fender AND Gibson to make those parts.

We often compare our vaping products and the copying of them to Guitar manufacturers... The significant difference is that the Gibson, Fender, PRS et al, DO have trademarks, copyrights, patents etc.... With huge legal teams to enforce them. And they do enforce them, quite frequently...

 

[cromagnon]

I would look up Gibson's Lawsuit with Ibanez and Paul Reed Smith... Heck, PRS wasn't even a knock off, just a similar single cut design not even claiming to be anything like a Les Paul, and Gibson still sued them... Ibanez never claimed their axe was a Les Paul... Anyone these days who makes a guitar that looks similar to a Les Paul is paying Gibson to do it... Same with the ES335 - paying Gibson... Have a double cutaway with a bolt on neck you want to take to market? You'll be paying Fender to do it... Making spare parts (Warmoth for example), they are paying Fender AND Gibson to make those parts.

We often compare our vaping products and the copying of them to Guitar manufacturers... The significant difference is that the Gibson, Fender, PRS et al, DO have trademarks, copyrights, patents etc.... With huge legal teams to enforce them. And they do enforce them, quite frequently...

Um, not quite:

Fender loses guitar copyright case | Fender Stratocaster | MusicRadar

Note that the artical is from 2009. Fender does however hold a copyright on their headstock shapes. The custom luthier, Ron Kirn who worked for fender has templates he made of several Telecaster and Stratocaster guitars that he uses (and even sells copies of the templates) in making his custom guitars and he pays no royalties to Fender.

Also, small changes to the body shape can help get around Gibson's copyright infringement, the Korean made Agile 2xxx and 3xxx lines are examples. St. Blues guitars take design elements from both Fender and Gibson - they pay no royalties.

Just wanted to put some clarification on that.

 

[dam718]

You're correct, it is the headstock designs that require licensing... They don't always win either... Gibson's dispute with PRS was eventually settled, the PRS Single Cut was different enough that it didn't infringe on the Gibson copyright. There was a stop sale injunction for quite a long time on the PRS Single Cut. The Ibanez copy was straight pulled from the market. Point is, the "counterfeits" (complete reproductions to include logos, shape, size, pickup configurations, scale length, neck radius, etc...) are often disputed in a legal forum by well paid legal teams, paid for by the original manufacturers (In this case, Gibson and Fender). Our "original" vaping equipment manufacturers that we're discussing here don't have the disposable income to spend on huge legal disputes. It's a shame, cause they would probably win...

 

[CoolWhip2Go]

Imo, it's all about supply and demand. People want the affordable clones, they buy them, so the cloners make them. Is there a difference between my Russian 91% and the $15 "Rocket" tank? Absolutely! The machining, the material, etc. Should the cloners "clone" the logos etc? No, but are they trademarked / copyrighted? A good example is the "Nemesis"... it is "Death Angel" by Anne Stokes. I wonder if the right to put her image was purchased / given to the original maker of the Nemesis? People can go back and forth on this topic but the end result is if you price a mod for $300+, a majority of the vaping community can not afford this. If you want people to buy your product, make it affordable. What's the difference between $200+ pair of designer jeans and a $20 pair of Levi's??? They both made out of denim.....

Hey, if you can afford a Mercedes or BMW... more power to ya. Me, i'll stick to my Honda Civic. It gets me to and from where i need to go. I know of many people who can get awesome clouds and great vape from a $15 IGO rda...

no haters please... just my opinion.

 

[CoolWhip2Go]

I'd say that's between Atmomixani and Anne Stokes... If you think that Atmomixani is violating a law, why don't you send Ms Stokes a letter letting her know that her work may be getting used without her permission? You may come to find out that Atmomixani does indeed have her blessing, and she is allowing them to use the image without a licensing fee at all. Or better yet, you may find out that Atmomixani is paying her licensing fees. Just because you can't find proof that they aren't over the internet doesn't automatically mean they are using the image without permission...

Sorry, i didnt see that you covered the Anne Stokes image already before i posted my opinion. I think its great that the image was licensed from her; that's how it should be. Cloning is never going to stop if consumers keep buying....