[averydonovan]

This is really sad that somebody would do this. I think it is really nice that Dr. Meier puts his designs out there so we can learn from them or use them for stuff we build for our personal use. I just hope the person who did this isn't the person I'm thinking of

 

[fewtch]

OK... unless people are gonna say who this is, stop it stop it stop it...

 

[Jan Meier]

Dear Headfellows,

Thank you for your massive support, both here in this thread as in the large number of mails/messages that I received.

A fellow-Headfier has also debugged his filter and confirmed my findings. The filter is an exact copy of the enhanced bass natural crossfeed filter.

Just a few remarks.

I have no intention to expose the person at this stage. I'll contact him later personally after I've spoken to an ex-colleague who happens to be a patent-lawyer. (I used to work with a high-tech company in a field where patents are extremely important. I own approximately 20 patents myself). I hope your support will make him understand that his attitude has been rather dishonest and that he will agree for a settlement among gentlemen.

A patent on the crossfeed filter has been filed with the European Patent Office. As such I have no protection in the US. However, the person we're talking about is living and producing in the European Community.

Cheers,

Jan

 

[Edwood]

Quote:

Originally posted by Jan Meier I hope your support will make him understand that his attitude has been rather dishonest and that he will agree for a settlement among gentlemen. A patent on the crossfeed filter has been filed with the European Patent Office. As such I have no protection in the US. However, the person we're talking about is living and producing in the European Community. Cheers, Jan

Aha! He's really caught now!

You are a very generous person, Jan.

It's pretty refreshing, well at least from the lawsuit happy land.

-Ed

 

[KR...]

Quote:

Originally posted by fewtch OK... unless people are gonna say who this is, stop it stop it stop it...

I had a good idea as to who it was before, but now I think I know for sure.

 

[Genetic]

Quote:

Originally posted by Wodgy Nope. Read up on intellectual property law sometime. Unless patents have been filed (Linkwitz may have), the designs are not protected. Engineers are often naive about these issues. Read the book I suggested in an earlier post. It will open your eyes.

Damm.... years ago, I should have taken that international property law course instead of going in «biolaw» ....

Just a reminder that the situation is more complex than it appears to be. I dont want to play the devil advocate but we should let the «main players» take the honorable road and resolve this between themselves.

Jan you said : «I hope your support will make him understand that his attitude has been rather dishonest and that he will agree for a settlement among gentlemen.»

And I'm a little worry that we are in fact taking side before all has been said and done in the proper forum. That said, if you are, and it looks good for you on some levels, vindicated, your great reputation will contribute to administer a last and probably fatal blow to the dishonest side. But, the popular support, should be expressed in the last part of the process.

Amicalement

 

[bangraman]

No-one thought to look inside in a year? Even with the potting compound the layout's a dead giveaway. After de-potting and... er... copying the design for use in an amp, I then twigged it was the one posted on Headwize.


Since Dr. Meier wasn't producing it (the basic version) and given that what's being charged the last time I checked is pretty much a fair labour + parts, I don't really see the huge problem. Sure the Dr. is pissed, but if you post it, people will make it and not everyone can afford a Cross-1 or want to buy a Porta Corda / Airhead / etc. I see it as a niche being filled and it would be a shame if that level of product availability became extinct.


However, that does not explain why he would deny that the design was lifted from the Headwize article... that's rather puzzling. Would you care to outline his reply Dr Meier? Was it an outright denial? In which case you have a clear case... for something

But I would hope that you reach an agreement that allows this individual to continue producing the items.

 

[markl]

Quote:

i guess we should be telling/asking the same things of bands like metallica. it's their fault their music is being "stolen." they put it out on there! that's just asking for it to be copied!

grinch READ posts before you attack. Too fast on the draw, there dude. I specifically said it was NOT Jan's fault for being ripped off. I also said I don't condone what the person did at all. My point was there are likely legal nuances that make this anything but an open or closed case, and it appears I was right about that.

 

[Lisa]

I can understand that you overlook the need to ask for permission if the design is openly published to be used by others. But when you make it and sell it to someone else even if it is just labour and parts you should at least mention that's it's a Dr. Meier X-feed. I think he never said it was his design, but by not saying it's someone elses you imply it yours. And that's not on.

 

[spwal]

i cant even listen to dark side of the moon anymore

 

[RickG]

Quote:

Originally posted by spwal i cant even listen to dark side of the moon anymore

ROTFLMAO....That's one of the funniest post I've ever read here on Head-fi. Unfortunately, I may have to delete it...

(still rolling and laughing)

 

[Mr.PD]

This is very upsetting to me. I hope Dr Meier gets this settled soon, to his satisfaction.
I may be the only one here that doesn't know who you guys are talking about. Probably because I don't follow the cross feed circuit. I like my music annoyingly natural.

 

[taoster]

Quote:

Originally posted by Mr.PD Probably because I don't follow the cross feed circuit. I like my music annoyingly natural.

You mean unnatural!
The circuit is called the natural crossfeed.

 

[PinkFloyd]

I have just been made aware of this thread from a fellow head-fier and it appears a finger of accusation is being pointed in my direction from a lot of ill informed people.

I do not appreciate being called a liar, a scumbag, a cheat, a pirate or a conman and I am ashamed at head-fiers who think I am any of these.

I'll keep this short and to the point so it's easier for you all to understand.

The original X-Feed "was" based on the Jan Meier enhanced crossfeed design. I gave Jan full credit on my website and, fortunately, the internet "wayback" machine http://www.waybackmachine.org/ has archived the original page: http://web.archive.org/web/200302142...eak/x-feed.htm

I think it can clearly be seen that I wasn't pulling the wool over anybodies eyes and the statement on the website was as follows " The X-Feed circuit utilised in this design is an enhanced version of the Jan meier circuit specially adapted to suit the X-Can series of Headphone amps. It features high quality components with silver solder connections throughout. Each circuit is fully tested and is then encased in resin to avoid microphony and to prevent oxidisation."

"adapted" meaning it was boxed up and fitted with RCA sockets so it could be connected to an amp and source. Where it says "this design is an enhanced version of the Jan meier circuit" it should have read "this design is the enhanced version of the Jan meier circuit.

OK. That's that cleared up........ the early versions of the X-Feed "were" based on the Jan Meier design...... I think that's blatantly obvious from the description, and the pictures, and I made these circuits up for the cost of parts, postage and packing and am actually "losing" money trying to help head-fiers out, I certainly haven't made anything out of it. It's been a hobby all along and anybody in their right mind will know that.

The latest X-Feed? Well, as I stand accused of being some form of low life that lives in the gutter and is out to rip the world off I am "forced" to front "my" circuit in order to clear my name...... well, here it is:

That's about all I've got to say on this unfortunate subject... I honestly do not want to waste my time saying any more. For those of you who know me, you know that I'm 100% above board and go out of my way to help. For those of you who don't know me..... well, you're entitled to your opinions but I'd rather not be accused of being a con man as I have never conned anybody.

This thread has upset me a lot and It would be nice to think I'll receive an apology from both Dr. Meier and those who said some pretty nasty things. The evidence is in front of you, all I can say is "thank god the website was archived by an independant body" If you hadn't seen the truth with your own eyes you would have actually "believed" I had done something wrong.

Pinkie.

 

[Jan Meier]

Dear Headfellows,

Just a few facts that I think should be presented.

# Michael never contacted me and never asked me for allowance to use my design for commercial use.

# Just before I contacted Michael, which is approximately half a year ago, I extensively searched his website for clues on the design and origin of the filter. At that time these were not given. It might be that they have been shown at an earlier stage but I can't deny nor confirm. The fact that they have been removed, in my opinion, speaks for itself.

# I explicitly asked Michael whether he used one of my designs. He explicitly denied.

# The picture below shows the filter that I received. According to the owner it was purchased pretty recently. The enclosure indicates that this filter indeed has been made not long ago. Previous filters used different enclosures.

# The next pictures show the circuit board. People who are able to read color codes can identify the resistors as 330 Ohm and 2.2 kOhm. The red capacitors are 220 nF and there's a non-visible capacitor of 47 nF present below the glue. The glue also covers two 2 kOhm resistors. In no way has this circuitry anything to do with the circuitry that Michael just presented. I don't know when this latest incarnation was developed but it must have been very recently.

# My patent does not specifically protect the circuitry as shown in my article but more generally any passive 3-branch circuitry that has the same functionality. There are many ways and variations to implement such a circuitry. The patent does cover the circuitry as shown by Michael.

Cheers,

Jan