clones?

[edyle]

Genisis-style attys should be excluded from the whole Anti-Clone outrage. Raidy stated from the beginning that his design was not to be used for profit. Therefore all genisis atty makers are stealing his design and have no ground to stand on.

"Raidy stated that" ? What does that supposed to mean?

Maybe you mean that Raidy filed some sort of Patent Public so no private body could claim his design.

But the first sentence creates a conflict: "Genisis-style attys"; What does that mean? That sounds broad and not specific.

Maybe somebody could claim something about 'hydraulic brakes style". Maybe some tire manufacturer should claim something about another tyre manufacturer making the same 'style' threading - curved instead of straight!

 

[edyle]

yea, but my question is this bro...

say you have a clone, a real 1:1 copy of a authentic item like thats being ofered now on alot of the mods.....how do you tell its a clone? heck, like i said before, had a genuine authentic bla bla bla chi you clone. then i bought a clone that pretty much identical in every single way. i sold my authentic and bought another clone, so now i have two chi you clones. could i have sold my clone i paid $40 for and called it an original? you bet, 100% that i could have and 99.9.8% of the people out there wouldnt have known the difference at all. so let me ask you this. how do you know clones ARENT being sold as originals in the classifieds section?....you dont for sure, cause with some of this stuff, you cant tell the difference, even after owning the ORIGINAL!........now i can se if it was one of the el-cheapass fasttech clone of a clones, but the good quality stuff is as nice, and like i said before, in some cases NICER than the original.....so how can you tell if your buying a clone or not? buy from the modder? ok, so what keeps the modder from getting ...... over the whole clone thing and buying and reselling the CLONES as original product just to get back at the cloners and make that money? or maybe if you had the original box, but i dont save those, and what would keep people from putting a clone in the original box and selling it as original when in fact it is a clone? ive seen boxes for sale on ebay for everything from mods to guns cheap...cant go by the serial number cause like kato did with the hammer, they make an original run of X amount of items, then decide after the fact to make another run of the same and just pick up where they left off with the serial numbers, so now, someone cant say "thats a clone, the serial is 602 ( or whatever) but he only made 500!"..what if the cloners want their product as authentic as possible so they use the SAME SERIAL NUMBER RANGE as the modder did? then you cant even have a serial number lookup engine on your page cause the CLONE would have the SAME SERIAL RANGE as the originals!.... mojo makes a badge to go with his, but what keeps the cloners from cloning that too?


i wonder how many people out there are using their mods thinking they are a original product when in fact they are a clone?

just on the few what ifs i posted, would you be willing to go out and drop a couple of C notes on a mod that you havent a clue if its an original or not? i wouldnt thats for sure

theres to many variables bro, to many.

What is the question?
What keeps somebody from making counterfiet something? It happens all the time; you confuse things when you equate counterfiet with clone.

 

[CaliGrower]

a counterfeit and a "clone" are indeed 2 different things, i stand corrected. its kind of splitting hairs though ( not ment as a flame), but consider my use of the word clone as referring to an indistinguishable counterfeit, as thats what im talking about.

my questions, if you read down, is if you have a true 1:1 clone ( or counterfeit if youd rather that term be used) how do you distinguish it from the genuine article?..you cant, thats the point. if you could it wouldnt be a 1:1 !. even some of the so-called "experts" have said that.....

if you go back and re-read my post, every single point and question in it is valid.

 

[ItsEddie]

What's the difference between a Da Vinci painting and a modern copy?

If you want an original you pay for it. The guy selling the original isn't doing anything unethical.

The painting is a different situation.

We are talking about stainless steel battery tubes. One tube is $200+ and the other is an exact 1:1 copy and sells for $20.

 

[edyle]

a counterfeit and a "clone" are indeed 2 different things, i stand corrected. its kind of splitting hairs though ( not ment as a flame), but consider my use of the word clone as referring to an indistinguishable counterfeit, as thats what im talking about.

my questions, if you read down, is if you have a true 1:1 clone ( or counterfeit if youd rather that term be used) how do you distinguish it from the genuine article?..you cant, thats the point. if you could it wouldnt be a 1:1 !. even some of the so-called "experts" have said that.....

if you go back and re-read my post, every single point and question in it is valid.

Well you are doing it again; you equate counterfeit with clone.

You are talking about counterfeit, and applying to all clones.

The thread is about CLONES.

A counterfiet is a FRAUD.

Neither the FastTech Steam Turbine, not the HCigar Steam Turbine attempts to pretend to be a DaveD original Steam Turbine.
Its the same with tires:
Neither a Firestone Radial tyre nor a Goodyear Radial tyre attempts to pretend to be a Michellin Radial tyre.

Anytime the product has a fraudulent logo on it, it is counterfiet. All you said is that a person might have a counterfiet and not know it. This is true, but that concerns counterfieting, NOT cloning. You keep equating the two.

 

[edyle]

The painting is a different situation.

We are talking about stainless steel battery tubes. One tube is $200+ and the other is an exact 1:1 copy and sells for $20.

Well yeah; a painting is a different situation; anybody can paint stuff; that's centuries only technology; seems to me its a whole lot harder to make stainless steel.

Buy the $20 tube. Simple.

One person takes the bias that the $200 tube is a 'rip off'
One person takes the bias that the $20 tube is stealing the $200 tube design.

Maybe the guy selling the $200 tube got ripped off paying $100 for it. Why accuse him rip off or stealing or unethical.

 

[BigDaddyQ]

Well you are doing it again; you equate counterfeit with clone.

You are talking about counterfeit, and applying to all clones.

The thread is about CLONES.

A counterfiet is a FRAUD.

Neither the FastTech Steam Turbine, not the HCigar Steam Turbine attempts to pretend to be a DaveD original Steam Turbine.
Its the same with tires:
Neither a Firestone Radial tyre nor a Goodyear Radial tyre attempts to pretend to be a Michellin Radial tyre.

Anytime the product has a fraudulent logo on it, it is counterfiet. All you said is that a person might have a counterfiet and not know it. This is true, but that concerns counterfieting, NOT cloning. You keep equating the two.

A clone of anything is merely an exact duplicate. In otherwords, all counterfeits are clones. Whether they are a good clone or a bad clone is inconsequential. But not all clones are counterfeits. Where the term counterfeit comes in to play is when the person makes a clone, and markets or sales it as the original. There is nothing unethical with making and selling clones as long as you are honest and telling people it's a clone. Maybe there are some people out there trying to sell Nemesis or Chi You clones as the real deal. If there are, I haven't come across them yet. And as for the comparison to a Da Vinci painting, last time I checked you can order prints of any Da Vinci and many other artists out there. You can even find some nice hand painted "clones" of those same paintings. But they aren't the original and are not marketed as the original and therefore are NOT counterfeits. Clones are not unethical. Counterfeiting is. Oh and by the way, unless that person's logo is fully copyrighted and trademarked, anyone can use it if they want to. It's up to the person adapting that logo to protect it. If they choose not to protect their logo whether it's due to lack of funds to do so or any other reason, it's hardly their right to go off on rants in an interview or a forum about it. Mc Donalds is a good example of a company that goes to great lenghs to protect their logo, name and brand. If you aren't willing to do the same, then it's not our problem as the consumers. Nor should we feel ashamed for buying a clone over a original.

 

[SimianSteam]

"Raidy stated that" ? What does that supposed to mean?

Maybe you mean that Raidy filed some sort of Patent Public so no private body could claim his design.

But the first sentence creates a conflict: "Genisis-style attys"; What does that mean? That sounds broad and not specific.

Maybe somebody could claim something about 'hydraulic brakes style". Maybe some tire manufacturer should claim something about another tyre manufacturer making the same 'style' threading - curved instead of straight!

Simple. Raidy invented the Genisis atty. I believe he did file some kind of patent to keep people from marketing his design, but for some reason hasn't followed up on it. Regardless, anyone that makes a device based on his original design is already just as guilty as any cloner.

 

[edyle]

Quote Originally Posted by edyle View Post
"Raidy stated that" ? What does that supposed to mean?

Maybe you mean that Raidy filed some sort of Patent Public so no private body could claim his design.

But the first sentence creates a conflict: "Genisis-style attys"; What does that mean? That sounds broad and not specific.

Maybe somebody could claim something about 'hydraulic brakes style". Maybe some tire manufacturer should claim something about another tyre manufacturer making the same 'style' threading - curved instead of straight!

Simple. Raidy invented the Genisis atty. I believe he did file some kind of patent to keep people from marketing his design, but for some reason hasn't followed up on it. Regardless, anyone that makes a device based on his original design is already just as guilty as any cloner.

Well, if "Raidy stated that" means "Raidy invented the Genisis atty", then there's a language problem.

 

[SimianSteam]

Well, if "Raidy stated that" means "Raidy invented the Genisis atty", then there's a language problem.

Do you speak English? The two are not mutually exclusive. Raidy invented the Genesis atty, then stated that his design was not to be used for commercial gain.

 

[edyle]

Do you speak English? The two are not mutually exclusive. Raidy invented the Genesis atty, then stated that his design was not to be used for commercial gain.

Yes Sir I do speak English.

Raidy may have invented the Genesis atty, and Raidy may have stated statements, but stating statements does not amount to much.

Filing a patent on a patentable design amounts to something.


edit: here's an example English answer to the question:

The question being: What does the following quote mean:

Raidy invented the Genesis atty, then stated that his design was not to be used for commercial gain

An example of an answer to the question is:
"If his design was used for commercial gain, then Raidy would be very unhappy."

So my question remains: What does it really mean "Raidy stated that ......... " ?

What is the answer to the question?

 

[SimianSteam]

Yes Sir I do speak English.

Raidy may have invented the Genesis atty, and Raidy may have stated statements, but stating statements does not amount to much.

Filing a patent on a patentable design amounts to something.

He did patent it, as I said. He got so much crap for it that he basically quit the entire vaping scene.

There was a time when the idea of a patent in vaping was completely revolting to most of us. I don't know how long you've been vaping, but those of us that remember the backlash when Mike Buzzeti from NotCigs tried to patent VV. That cost him a good chunk of business. Patents are useless unless you've got the money to back them up with a lawsuit anyways.

Sometime in the past year vaping has turned from being about what's best for the community and started being about people cashing in. Sad.

 

[edyle]

He did patent it, as I said. He got so much crap for it that he basically quit the entire vaping scene.

There was a time when the idea of a patent in vaping was completely revolting to most of us. I don't know how long you've been vaping, but those of us that remember the backlash when Mike Buzzeti from NotCigs tried to patent VV. That cost him a good chunk of business. Patents are useless unless you've got the money to back them up with a lawsuit anyways.

Sometime in the past year vaping has turned from being about what's best for the community and started being about people cashing in. Sad.

Yep, I know you said he patented it; yep, I know you also indicated he kinda did not bother with it; that's his business.

I have not been vaping long; I am a 3 decade smoker and am glad to have an alternative and hope that other smokers continue to have ecigs as an alternative to get away from destroying their lungs.

 

[PLANofMAN]

This is not a "he said" "she said" situation. You can read the thread here on ECF that was started by raidy. I think it's called "all my mods" or something similar. You can read about his development and refinement of the Genisis system (and any atomizer designed to use mesh wicks and Kanthal wire is using that design), you can look up the patents, and you can read the post where he allows anyone to build one for themselves, provided they don't commercialize the design.

raidy's another Nikola Tesla who got screwed over by every George Westinghouse mod maker out there.

 

[PLANofMAN]

A 'real' steam turbine ?

A tire isn't a 'real' tire because it is designed a bit differently?
A tire isn't a 'real' tire because maybe it is lower quality and lower price?

You wouldn't use snow tires for a drag race, would you?
To answer your question though, you do need all four airholes for the Steam Turbine to work properly.

 

[gotch23]

While it is true that many clones work really great, it is a crapshoot with material-safety imho.
You never know, what they are actually made of. Stainless steel? Maybe it is... maybe not...
remember... they come from China... the country that brought you toxic toys, cosmetics, medicine... (counterfeits again).
They even shill fake food in their domestic market. Investigation of fake eggs in China. by FujiTV - YouTube
I noted that my pulse g-fake employs brass screws with some kind of coating... hello lead poisoning.
The fake Squape uses some kind of shady coating that peels off... yummy.
With battery holders... not as bad... but beware off their RBAs.

 

[edyle]

You wouldn't use snow tires for a drag race, would you?
To answer your question though, you do need all four airholes for the Steam Turbine to work properly.

And that just means the FastTech Steam Turbine isn't going to work properly.
It's still a REAL FastTech Steam Turbine.

 

[edyle]

This is not a "he said" "she said" situation. You can read the thread here on ECF that was started by raidy. I think it's called "all my mods" or something similar. You can read about his development and refinement of the Genisis system (and any atomizer designed to use mesh wicks and Kanthal wire is using that design), you can look up the patents, and you can read the post where he allows anyone to build one for themselves, provided they don't commercialize the design.

raidy's another Nikola Tesla who got screwed over by every George Westinghouse mod maker out there.

Nope there isn't any "he said" "she said" situation, and nobody said there was.

On the topic of clones whatever Raidy may have said is not very meaningful compared to Mr Raidy's PATENT. It is Mr Raidy's Patent that means something. So with all due respect to Mr Raidy, on the topic of cloning, whatever Mr Raidy may have said carries no weight compared to Mr Raidy's patent.

 

[PLANofMAN]

Try to keep up with the conversation. FT has two. One with four airholes, and one with two ( but it comes with a drip tip. Yay!).

They are both "real" clone Steam Turbines.

Edit: are you dense? raidy owns the patent on Genisis style atomizers.

 

[edyle]

Try to keep up with the conversation. FT has two. One with four airholes, and one with two ( but it comes with a drip tip. Yay!).

They are both "real" clone Steam Turbines.

Edit: are you dense? raidy owns the patent on Genisis style atomizers.

Sorry; I have edited my post now replacing the word PATENT with the wording "Mr Raidy's Patent" to hopefully avoid the misinterpretation.