[Robert Gehrke]

Jan: May I repeat that I never analyzed your amp. That's a crazy accusation. If you insist that I have stolen your intellectual property please go to a lawyer and let them make their job on the court.

 

[Hi-Finthen]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jaska /img/forum/go_quote.gif I don't know, but I kind of don't like thinking about amps right now... *Why trouble your "beautiful mind" with ethics or even War ...... Seriously, I considered both Meier-Audio and Headphonia amps not too long ago before I finally settled on an RSA design, and it's upsetting to read this kind of thing on a public forum. *So your upset as an owner of RSA design, built by Ray I hope..... But really, what more can you ask from Robert at this point? *How many ConHeads were sold? This matter hasn't (evidently) even been taken up officially/legally, and he's come right out and offered full refunds to anyone swayed by Jan's claims, with the suggestion that these customers would then be free to spend their money on Meier-Audio amps if that's what they want to do. *Cost a great amount of time and money to R&D an amplifier as well as go to court with a Lawyer with a prepared case in defence of that product as intellectual property. Unless the matter is actually taken up legally, and away from us, I don't see how we as consumers have much room for further judgment. Who would have known here without this post by Dr. Jan. and I believe readers should know what they are buying and how their product was brought to market. Especially here, with the free advertising by way of exposure thru reviews which steers a great many sales to the top preformers. That Headphonia thread has over 24,400 views. You do realise Meier Audio has generated over $2,500 donated to Head-Fi just last year, to keep these pages operating smoothly. This kind of thing really takes the hobby to an uncomfortable place, and as a consumer, makes me want to distance myself from it--at least somewhat.

Hey, ethics can be uncomfortable to read for some, however the loss of 200 amplifier sales can really be uncomfortable and costly to recover professionally in a court of law.

Letting the community be aware of the issue maybe the only recourse one may have that makes sense. If we, the readers care to trouble ourselves with ethical questions as we happilly go about choosing who to buy from. But maybe not, for some......

 

[Indygreg]

I have no dog in this race . . . do not even own an amp.

I think Jan is way off base to act like it is uncommon or wrong for Heaphonia not to A) give them sales numbers or B) customer info. I would be stunned if someone just offered that up. Especially when legal action might be coming. Bottom line - if you think you are about to be taken to court, do not do anything to help the other side. Never. Even when you are 100% innocent.

I also find this to look poorly on both, but to be honest more so Jan. Yet I cannot stop reading this thread. Sort of train wreck. However, since it has already started, I would like more info.

Show us pics of both, explain why it is identical.

 

[Skylab]

Actually, it WOULD be sort of interesting to have both parties post detailed pictures of the circuit boards of the amps. I'm not capable of reading them, but I am sure some here would be.

Then again, there is the risk that might lead to other potential copies, I suppose...

 

[Solitary1]

See what happens when you use crossfeed?

Seriously, the damage has been done. I think this thread should be locked and let the involved settle it the legal way. There's nothing else to be gained from further posting, just sides to be taken.

 

[cotdt]

So can anybody verify that the schematics used are the same? If so, then I think the vast majority of us would beleive that the Headphonia is a clone, and some fraction of those people would pick Jan's amp and get him his sales back, even though the Headphonia is a smaller amp. To prevent this kind of commercial cloning practice in the future, I think that this thread should continue. If the schematics are found to not match up, then Robert's reputation will be rightfully restored. Simple as that.

 

[Solitary1]

Quote:

Originally Posted by cotdt /img/forum/go_quote.gif So can anybody verify that the schematics used are the same? If so, then I think the vast majority of us would beleive that the Headphonia is a clone, and some fraction of those people would pick Jan's amp and get him his sales back, even though the Headphonia is a smaller amp. To prevent this kind of commercial cloning practice in the future, I think that this thread should continue. If the schematics are found to not match up, then Robert's reputation will be rightfully restored. Simple as that.

Who's anybody? You're asking one of the head-fi members to get in the middle of what could become a litigious matter between two commercial entities (irregardless of whether they're a fan, friend, or customer of either company)?

How in the hell is this forum going to keep commercial cloning from occurring in the future?

You're being naive, at best.

 

[Hi-Finthen]

Well said cotdt, and I also agree with you & Skylab for the boards to be posted and let Head-Fi readers compare if they are the same in the Corda porta and the ConHead ....

 

[Thelonious Monk]

while i'm fine with this being discussed here, i don't think any head-fiers should get mixed up with opening amplifiers and being in the middle of all this. if you're daring, go ahead and do it, but i think it would be better to allow the amplifier manufacturers to do this if they so please. it's messy business..

 

[wae5]

Hey, ethics can be uncomfortable to read for some, however the loss of 200 amplifier sales can really be uncomfortable and costly to recover professionally in a court of law.

I find it difficult to believe that all 200 Headphonia sales would have gone to Meier if Headphonia didn't exist. I bought a Headphonia amp because of Skylab's review. As far as I recall Skylab never mentioned or compared any Meier amp to any other amp in his roundup. If I didn't buy a Headphonia amp, I would have bought a Roy Samuels amp not a Meier amp.

 

[BIG POPPA]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solitary1 /img/forum/go_quote.gif See what happens when you use crossfeed? Seriously, the damage has been done. I think this thread should be locked and let the involved settle it the legal way. There's nothing else to be gained from further posting, just sides to be taken.

THE INTERNET IS THE DEVIL...........

 

[Solitary1]

Quote:

Originally Posted by BIG POPPA /img/forum/go_quote.gif THE INTERNET IS THE DEVIL...........

 

[feifan]

As in most controversies, both sides have enough truth on their side to fuel outrage. Still, I'm with those who are for keeping this thread going. I don't know enough about circuit designs, but is it possible that there are really only so many ways to layout a crossfeed function and that two (or more) parties could independently generate very similar designs? Or is the probability of similar designs so unlikely that copying is the only logical conclusion? I'd like to hear from some who are much more knowledgeable than I in the area of crossfeed design.

 

[cotdt]

Quote:

Originally Posted by feifan /img/forum/go_quote.gif As in most controversies, both sides have enough truth on their side to fuel outrage. Still, I'm with those who are for keeping this thread going. I don't know enough about circuit designs, but is it possible that there are really only so many ways to layout a crossfeed function and that two (or more) parties could independently generate very similar designs? Or is the probability of similar designs so unlikely that copying is the only logical conclusion? I'd like to hear from some who are much more knowledgeable than I in the area of crossfeed design.

The latter. If the schematics including the values are the same, then it's copied. For example, to set the gain there's an infinite number of ways to set the same gain. The chances that the values of the several components used are the same is vanishingly small. Another example are the bypass capacitors and power supply filter capacitors, where you can basically choose ANY value you want, and arrange them in any way you want. When all of these (and everything else) is the same, and even the brands for the capacitors and resistors are the same, then yeah... makes you wonder...

 

[Jaska]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hi-Finthen /img/forum/go_quote.gif Why trouble your "beautiful mind" with ethics or even War ......

Blown completely out of context. I was replying to nickchen's post, which read: "Is it only me, but I found Robert Gehrke's contributions not that convincing... nothing that I could analyze clearly, more a feeling in the belly, a feeling of being uncandid... "

*So your upset as an owner of RSA design, built by Ray I hope.....

Yes, I find the contents of this thread upsetting. Yes, I own an RSA amp. No, we're not here to discuss whether or not Ray built my amp. I really don't see your point.

*How many ConHeads were sold?

That question has apparently already been asked. It's up to Robert or the courts to decide whether or not to answer the question. BTW, isn't "Conhead" the name of the next amp to be released?

*Cost a great amount of time and money to R&D an amplifier as well as go to court with a Lawyer with a prepared case in defence of that product as intellectual property.

I imagine this is true. I also imagine this is a cost of doing business. Why should different rules apply to headphone amplifier manufacturers?

Who would have known here without this post by Dr. Jan. and I believe readers should know what they are buying and how their product was brought to market. Especially here, with the free advertising by way of exposure thru reviews which steers a great many sales to the top preformers. That Headphonia thread has over 24,400 views.
You do realise Meier Audio has generated over $2,500 donated to Head-Fi just last year, to keep these pages operating smoothly.

Legal systems are in place for a reason. Arguably, this sort of airing of dirty laundry should be kept from consumers until legal proceedings dictate otherwise. I believe I'm entitled to this opinion, and respect your decision to disagree. I do recognize that Jan Meier has contributed a lot to Head-Fi, and if you search my posts, you'll actually see that I have quite recently tried to make it a point to buy headphones from him since his prices are good and he's a sponsor.

Hey, ethics can be uncomfortable to read for some, however the loss of 200 amplifier sales can really be uncomfortable and costly to recover professionally in a court of law.

Letting the community be aware of the issue maybe the only recourse one may have that makes sense. If we, the readers care to trouble ourselves with ethical questions as we happilly go about choosing who to buy from. But maybe not, for some......

Again, let's agree to disagree. Legal services are expensive, we all know that. Legal services are also very useful, as are things like patents.

So, I really have not tried to take sides in this mess. The point really is that it's a thing best left to the two gentlemen in question (and the legal system) to work out.