The difference is that with *fires and other clones the original designer/maker had already profited from it or is still making profits. And they didn't make a contract with anyone to create a design and then not pay for his creation. They just made clones.
Letting the reader decide whether to buy the light despite the back story is ideal. But we know what is ideal seldom happens in reality. Because of the good review, most of the people who read it will buy the light from Xeccon. The effect is Xeccon profited from a design they ripped off Javier, bottomline.
I believe it matters "how" it got stolen and "what" got stolen.
"how" it got stolen (from what I understand by this thread and not knowing the issue any further) for me is a big red flag. You don't steal your business partner, period.
"what" got stolen is something I didn't understand by reading this thread... Does this flashlight has something really different than any other flashlight? Is it just "similar looking" to the original design or there is a real invention underneath that got stolen?
I am probably not buying it because I don't like to encourage thieves, but I would like to read a review about it. It surely hurts the original designer to not earn from it what he should, but it could also give him some positive feelings reading an educated opinion about his design in which he is credited properly.
Actually according to that recent lawsuit, a lot of our lights' designs are copied from Surefire and its design. A good example would be Solarforce. Just a degree of "severity".
So then, where's the line? So this case is a design copy of 2 "partners".... similar cases happened before to Sunwayman, 47s Maelstrom etc right? That variable ring control design case. And now they are the ones being sued by Surefire.
We even had a really big group buy ~100pcs with Dinodirect? LOL!
And now we have budgetlights copying that ring design.
Yes that is not merely cloning, the design was stolen if i remember correctly, quite similar to this case.
Etc etc.... I can't remember and so can't post everything....
I don’t see the point of a review or of taking a free light from this company.
The only point of a review is to let people know it’s OK to buy the product. Why review it and say it’s a good dive light but you should buy it from this company?
To me the circumstances in this case are quite different from a company copying a Surefire. In the case of a Surefire clone they just looked at a Surefire and did their own version.
I don’t really see any clones that actually look like a Surefire 6P for instance to me.
In the current case they we given Javier’s specs and misused them.
Bro, i think that is just semantics. All along the folks here (esp those in Germany I read) who support IP advocate "copying = copying no matter how you twist it".
Problem is, the clones on DX/powerwholesale/ez-young/bestinone.net don't really look the same too, in fact they slapped their own chinese brands and logos. LOL! It's very easy to differentiate.
The other case of copying of the variable control magnetic ring design is very much similar to this case. There was a blatant copy of the design, specifications and "how-to-do-it" (notes and all, it was posted on CPF but i can't find it now) from 4 sevens.
Actually I have really have no interest in such cases regarding IP, just sharing info here man. My point is that cases like these always happens....
"Just providing the story of the other side of the coin". Coz i see so many cases of "copying" in various degrees, hence i'd like to ask "where do we draw the line". If you read the posts @ CPF especially, it's as if we are providing a death sentence....
Just saying... seriously i have no interest in the lights. hehe...
Well, I go away for a few weeks and I miss all the drama (and spam, apparently). Since I'm out of the loop and don't have the time to play catch up at the moment, I haven't made up my mind and will refrain from making any comments. That said, it looks like an interesting design. Anyone have a link to the DX version, please?
Thank you for all your opinions and votes. Most of you bring up some very good points of conjecture. After a lot of careful consideration, Ive decided not to post my review of this light. While it is a fantastic and well crafted design (for its actual intent), I simply can not ignore all the outrageous lies the seller has posted across multiple forums to its members. I feel that my posting a review of this light would be condoning their extremely unprofessional behavior and setting a very poor example for other sellers to follow. While I am rather surprised that the majority of our members would still enjoy reading the review; in consideration of all the wrong doing the seller has been caught red-handed at, I for one can not in good conscientious support it.
My personal feelings are: IF YOU ARE CONSIDERING ANY XECCON PRODUCT OF ANY TYPE, PLEASE LOOK ELSEWHERE. This so called company is morally corrupt and has fabricated the wildest of lies to sell a product that they did not design or manufacture.
As has been the case in the past, XECCON = "Mark as SPAM" Its companies like these that give good products a bad name.
Whether you chose to post or not, I appreciate that you asked for feedback on a difficult decision. Again, kudos to you and I respect your decision and your reasoning not to post.
Also, like I said before, I don't have a horse in this race and I think if a company's behavior is brought up on a public forum, they should have a right to respond. That said, do you really believe it's a smart business decision to come here and try to insult a respected member of this forum?
I have been pretty busy these past few months and other than what I read here, I don't know anything about this whole business. I do know that you registered here to insinuate that one of our own somehow cheated you. Someone who I and others here know to be a good guy, I might add.
Instead of explaining the situation, which might have done you some good considering how highly BLF tends to rank on Google, you chose to make it personal. And that alone is enough to make me want to avoid your company and its products.
