[Hi-Finthen]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mandrake /img/forum/go_quote.gif IIRC, there were claims that both amps had elements in common w/ a previous design. Should we not ask for photos and diagrams for these as well? In general, the amount of evidence relative to words in this thread is scanty. Let's see more evidence. And if one can't offer evidence w/o revealing trade secrets (or offering up customer info) both of which seem legit reasons, then please hire lawyers or seek some solution. I suspect that it's such a small business that lawyers are not an option. One can't sell enough amps to hire lawyers and also eat. Not sure if one can sell enough amps to eat, anyway. Hence brinksmanship on both sides is the only option. If that is the case, let's see more evidence.

Well, we have been waiting for Roberts reply, as he said he would reply with the schematic drawing of his Conhead circuits ....

 

[kevin gilmore]

I've stared at the schematics and pictures i have been sent
(not by jan) and after 2 hours my eyes hurt. Might have something to
do with the 101 fever i'm currently running. It was clear that the person
who sent me the stuff was clearly NOT in jan's corner.

I'm 100% in Dr. jan meiers corner. There is no ambiguity. The headphonia
is a direct rip of jan's design and should be banned from head-fi.
Same as people selling clones of the grado amplifier.

Other knowledgable people, ti khan, christina palmer, phil larrocco and
a few others might want to add their comments.

 

[gpalmer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kevin gilmore /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'm 100% in Dr. jan meiers corner. There is no ambiguity. The headphonia is a direct rip of jan's design and should be banned from head-fi.

Thanks for the post, especially in light of your illness. I had a feeling that would be the upshot since from what I know of Dr. Meier's past behavior I would be astounded to find out he had started this thread without being 100% certain. I'm sorry it's happening again although at least so far we haven't had any racial slurs thrown his way.

 

[GreatDane]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kevin gilmore /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'm 100% in Dr. jan meiers corner. There is no ambiguity. The headphonia is a direct rip of jan's design and should be banned from head-fi.

WOW

 

[Morph201]

X2 That message is DIRECT AND CLEAR! I assume if that were the case, it would have an impact on anyone trying to sell a headphonia in the FS forum (?)

 

[braillediver]

"from what I know of Dr. Meier's past behavior I would be astounded to find out he had started this thread without being 100% certain."

Exactly. He wouldn't bring this up if he wasn't sure of it.


Mitch

 

[d-cee]

oK! someone needs to fwd: the same files to amb, ppl, tangeant and morsel pronto!

 

[Tyll Hertsens]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kevin gilmore /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'm 100% in Dr. jan meiers corner. There is no ambiguity. The headphonia is a direct rip of jan's design and should be banned from head-fi.

While I'm more than willing to believe the Headphonia design is a rip-off, I don't think thier sales should be banned. Commerce is hardball, and (unless Jan's design is patented) it's not illegal to staight up copy someones work---it's just distastefull, ugly, and unimaginative. I think Jan did the only thing he can do: let the folks here know what happened and let the chips fall as they may. Now, Head-Fiers have the choice of saving a couple of bucks buying a cheap rip-off, or supporting a long-time, valued member of the community.

Make sure you vote wisely with that sorry wallet!

 

[Jaska]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Morph201 /img/forum/go_quote.gif I assume if that were the case, it would have an impact on anyone trying to sell a headphonia in the FS forum (?)

Actually, why would anyone who's read this thread try to sell a Headphonia amp (for a loss) here on Head-Fi when Robert's already publicly offered to issue full refunds for them?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robert Gehrke /img/forum/go_quote.gif Everyone who purchased the earlier amp and don't believe me I offer you to send back your amp and you get a full refund (Paypal fees are not refundable). I won't insist on the usual 30 day money back limit. That way you may order the supposed original amp by Jan Meier. Robert Gehrke

 

[Hi-Finthen]

Bringing into question , "The contracts that civil men live by" , IE ethical choices and their behaviors , rather than the letter of the law judgements and redress by restitution .

Should the onus only become the burden of the community made up exclusivly of the buyers and tradesmen , and of no concern of Head-Fis , even if ethics are of concern ?

Does Head-Fi have any right to enforce ethical behavior by witholding the privilage of membership then ?

Ethical behavior "The contracts that civil men live by" , would seem to have both responsibilities and benefits which Head-Fi has both a right and obligation to uphold in its defence as an ethical community IMO.

Otherwise, what have we exchanged then , exclusively for the benefit of a lower price ?

 

[brospin]

Leaving legal questions apart, that I don't have the intention to comment, all this disgusting Headphonia affair has confirmed a statement that I already had proved by myself: The Porta Corda is a fantastic amp!!! Who would take the risk of building a 1:1 copy of an amp that is not special?

 

[kramer5150]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyll Hertsens /img/forum/go_quote.gif While I'm more than willing to believe the Headphonia design is a rip-off, I don't think thier sales should be banned. Commerce is hardball, and (unless Jan's design is patented) it's not illegal to staight up copy someones work---it's just distastefull, ugly, and unimaginative. I think Jan did the only thing he can do: let the folks here know what happened and let the chips fall as they may. Now, Head-Fiers have the choice of saving a couple of bucks buying a cheap rip-off, or supporting a long-time, valued member of the community. Make sure you vote wisely with that sorry wallet!

I think I have to respectfully disagree with you Tyll... unless you can convince me otherwise

While there may not be anything legally wrong with cloning an amp... IMHO it gouges the original designer when the clones are offered for sale as a commercial product.

It can take years to research, develop, plan, and market-strategize a design and bring it to life as a commercial product. For someone to come along and commercially knock it off in a month, is undercutting the up-front efforts and financial sacrifices of the original designer.

Furthermore... IMHO it also hurts those designers who DO release their own unique designs, and proceed with the honorable path and choose not to commercially clone.

I was faced with this moral question when I DIY woodied my HF1. My PM box was full of requests from other Gradoheads to woody mod theirs for a small fee. I respectfully turned them down for 2 reasons... One, I don't think I could physically keep up with the production demand. Two (main reason), Out of respect to Larrys business I didn't want to gouge what he has worked so hard to establish. I wouldn't be able to look myself in the mirror and carry out such sales.

HOWEVER, in regards to the headphonia IMHO the verdict is still out.... I for one would still like to see opinions of the other amp experts before I pick one side or the other.

Thanks everyone for such an informative thread. This could have easily degenerated into a bash-session and a bunch of speculation. Hats off to everyone for refraining, and seeking appropriate data and information.

Thanks all... peace

 

[kramer5150]

Quote:

Originally Posted by brospin /img/forum/go_quote.gif Leaving legal questions apart, that I don't have the intention to comment, all this disgusting Headphonia affair has confirmed a statement that I already had proved by myself: The Porta Corda is a fantastic amp!!! Who would take the risk of building a 1:1 copy of an amp that is not special?

x2... I'm definitely going to give it a close loot (edit- oops I mean *look*) at the big meet.

If I like it the loot will surely follow.

 

[Febs]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kramer5150 /img/forum/go_quote.gif I think I have to respectfully disagree with you Tyll... unless you can convince me otherwise While there may not be anything legally wrong with cloning an amp... IMHO it gouges the original designer when the clones are offered for sale as a commercial product. It can take years to research, develop, plan, and market-strategize a design and bring it to life as a commercial product. For someone to come along and commercially knock it off in a month, is undercutting the up-front efforts and financial sacrifices of the original designer.

This is precisely why patents exist.

 

[jude]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Febs /img/forum/go_quote.gif This is precisely why patents exist.

I recognize the difficulty an amp manufacturer might have (on a number of fronts) to seek such protection on all of his designs. And, as one of the administrators/moderators of this site, I do not allow the marketing of "clones" on Head-Fi (and, most of the time, without explicit permission of the designer(s), even the specific design discussion of them).

In other words, in addition to the buying decisions of a rather close-knit community, there may be other means to afford some degree of protection for those who wish to introduce their products to the community without the disincentive to do so that might come from the experience of seeing one's product(s) "cloned." While this might be a mere pittance of protection in the big scheme of things, it matters here at least.