Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: davep Nov 25 2008, 02:07 PM

a new thread on Air Cooled Technology:

http://forums.aircooledtechnology.com/showthread.php?p=23001#post23001

it was not a smart move on someones part.

Posted by: ONTHEGRIND Nov 25 2008, 02:13 PM

Posted by: p914 Nov 25 2008, 02:13 PM

Spread the word and name of the perp so we all know who and where this jergoff is.

Posted by: Drums66 Nov 25 2008, 02:14 PM

Posted by: ericread Nov 25 2008, 02:18 PM

Just for the record;

I didn't do it!

Eric Read

Posted by: DBCooper Nov 25 2008, 02:36 PM

Ididn't either, but that won't go anywhere. Without a patent there's no "intellectual property" to protect.

Posted by: jimkelly Nov 25 2008, 02:38 PM

oh come on - i was whittleing a 2.0 head out of a bar of soap in my prison cell - how the hell did jake find me all cozy in my upper bunk ?? i am gonna find the snitch and force him to give me a cigarette for my troubles : )

Posted by: Thomas J Bliznik Nov 25 2008, 02:57 PM

I didn't do it!!!!

I recently bought a pair of #7500 Leading Edge 180" CNC 2.0 914 Replica 3-stud intake heads from Len/Jake for my camshaft replacement project. I didn't like a few things & corrected a few minor items to my satisfaction (see my recent post). I went on his web site a few weeks ago to buy a part & found out I am banned when I tried to log in. He is very sensitive to constructive criticism.

Heck I got over it. Maybe I better check the bushes before going into my garage for peeping Jakes

Seriously: I understand Len & Jake's concern. They put their life's work into the business & have a right to protect their hard work.

Tom

Posted by: r_towle Nov 25 2008, 03:01 PM

That sucks.
Its happened to him before and it just sucks that it keeps happening.

I guess its to hard to sell the stuff and ensure that the buyer is for real...or the buyer didnt just buy the stuff to replicate his work.

Reverse engineering happens all the time. I guess the nice part of the Internet is that work travels fast and hopefully the discount heads will be avoided.

Rich

Posted by: Todd Enlund Nov 25 2008, 03:19 PM

I really don't even see how anyone could do it cheaper... at least not substantially cheaper. Unless they planned on using old heat cycled 1.7 heads as cores. A pair of new AMC heads is $700, plus $1200 worth of machine work...

Posted by: brer Nov 25 2008, 03:42 PM

Carbon copying Len's ports is not cool, and thats really where the trouble lies with CNC. Its a fantastic technology but a double edge sword or sorts.

That said, converting a 1.7 or AMC head to 2L really isn't that hard for a good cylinder head shop to do.

Posted by: pete-stevers Nov 25 2008, 05:08 PM

i dunno.... i think jake makes a great product, no doubt
but love him or hate him
(and i kinda like him)
but he is a bit of a drama queen

Posted by: Rob Ways Nov 25 2008, 06:07 PM

Geez. Jake and Len are good guys. They have more important things to do. Anyone know the perp?

Posted by: HAM Inc Nov 25 2008, 06:12 PM

In this digital age we live in, that statement couldn't be more true. But, alas! The devil is in the details!
90+% of the work that is important to reliability is not performed by the job shop CNC, at least not yet. And a significant % of the performance details are also not performed on the CNC. The cat that knows his stuff is still worth the extra $.

Whoever you are, all I have to say on the matter is: Copy away! If you survive the wrath of Jake for the 6 months or so that the copied version is a current representation of our work, you will soon enough be producing an out of date design. Though the tweaking is subtle, for the most part, at this point of our T4 development, it is constant. Rust never sleeps, and neither does Jake!

Posted by: 904svo Nov 25 2008, 06:21 PM

No sooner than Jake and Len come out with a new head design they are all ready
working on a new design that mades the old one out dated.

Keep up the good work Len.

Posted by: kwales Nov 25 2008, 06:52 PM

Looks like Jake has branded his products.

You go dude!

When this is all over, we want to see a picture of "Aircoled Technologies" "branded" into his butt.

Ken

Posted by: 914Sixer Nov 25 2008, 07:06 PM

Damm, nothing is safe any more! But there is an old saying:

YOU GET WHAT YOU PAY FOR

Posted by: Joe Owensby Nov 25 2008, 08:40 PM

It is not cool copying something that was developed by someone else, nor is it cool for someone to buy something that was copied. This applies to type IV engine components, Boeing airplanes, all the way down to illegally copying CD's. It is all stealing in one way or another. Jake and Len have expended time and money to develop their engine components and systems, and part of the cost in purchasing these is to pay for the development costs. If we don't support their business, they won't be able to stay and develop more so we all suffer.

I would suspect that the typical market for this type of technology is confined to a focused group of individuals, and that peer pressure should be reasonably effective in preventing knock offs from being too popular. The internet boards are probably one of the best ways to have the facts shared, so everyone knows what is going on, and can ask for more details if they are in the process of making a purchasing decision. Most people don't like a thief, and would help to minimize purchases of stolen technology. But, unfortunately there will always be at least one person taking advantage of a situation.

I hope this gets solved for the best for Jake and Len.

Posted by: Chris Hamilton Nov 25 2008, 08:54 PM

Well he certainly knows how to talk big...

I don't think he has a legal leg to stand on though, plenty of other people have done porting jobs on VW Bus heads before.

Posted by: Jake Raby Nov 25 2008, 08:56 PM

For the record:
I have never banned anyone from my Type 4 Store, matter of fact there is no way to do that through the software. I have banned people from m,y forum, when they broke my very specific rules. Thomas Bliznik is not banned from anything as far as I know, and **I** am the ONLY administrator.

Now lets address this:

Absolutely incorrect. People that think this haven't spent the money and time on the topic that I have.

The LE series heads are a branded component that is the intellectual property of HAM and RAT. These are components that are utilized to create engines and engine kits that are proprietary to our companies, these engines can't be patented. There is virtually no way to patent a port shape or process, not for us or anyone else. BUT these ports are branded and part of a pedigreed assembly that is recognized Internationally- all of these things matter in this case, just like they did with my DTM.

I learned all about this in 2004 when someone got busted replicating my DTM. He **thought** that since the shroud wasn't patented that there was nothing I could do about it. I ran his ass underground and proved him very wrong.

So, we'll let the legal staff do their part- they get paid very well for what they do because they are the best, boldest, most aggressive team of assholes I could find- they specialize in this and I keep them on retainer.

At any rate, we take all of this seriously, some may call it drama, but they haven't ever worked their entire fucking life to achieve a goal only for some worthless son of a bitch to steal it.

Unlike others in this Industry, Len and I are not retiring soon and we are continuing to carry forward momentum with everything we do. All we can do is constantly keep our eyes and ears open and do what we can to provide security for our developments.

I take everything that happens under this roof seriously, nothing is more important to me and that includes family- thats not bullshit.

Posted by: biosurfer1 Nov 25 2008, 09:05 PM

Was he trying to replicate them for his own use or did he say he was going to try and sell them?

Posted by: Chris Hamilton Nov 25 2008, 09:13 PM

Either the port designs are patented and the guy is trying to copy them
-or-
The guy was selling them to people under a trademarked brand ( assuming LE is a trademark )


-IF- either of those are true, the guy is gonna get what's coming to him. If neither are true this is a case of legal bullying. You can copy the shit out of a design that isn't patented, and you can call it whatever you want if the brand isn't a trademark.

Posted by: CliffBraun Nov 25 2008, 09:29 PM

QFT. All jake can do if neither of those is true is talk about it online and hope to discourage buyers.

Posted by: flippa Nov 25 2008, 09:41 PM

Kick their ass Jake!!!!!! Take no prisoners!!!!

I have had my work copied. They say ithat immitation is the greatest form of flattery, but that is bullshit!

It's just a creap trying to save and/or make a quick buck & cheat you out of your money, and it sucks!

Bury them!

Posted by: brer Nov 25 2008, 09:50 PM

did he even touch them? whats actually been stolen?

I hope this isn't all because of something some girl said.




(uh, humor)

Posted by: Jake Raby Nov 25 2008, 09:52 PM

Mr. Hamilton,
Are you a Lawyer or just a regular smart ass?

I have already been through this and I KNOW what is involved and what my rights are.

What matters right now is the person was busted before he was able to do any real harm. I made the post on my forum to make our following aware that this had occurred and now thousands of people are watching out for us all over the World.

Let the fact be known that the opinions or comments made by those on this forum mean nothing as none of you here have all the facts, nor do you understand the composition of my business- (nor is it any of your business what I do, how I do it or why)

No matter what occurs legally, copying our components or anyone elses isn't cool.

There is a possibility that some replication has already occured from one of our profiles, the plot was foiled as the person was attempting to copy a 200CFM port.

So, let me deal with this, if I wanted to field the smart ass comments from the armchair Lawyers here I would have posted the info here-

Posted by: TimT Nov 25 2008, 09:57 PM

wait didn't you post that? on your own site? just breaking balls...

funny

Posted by: Phoenix 914-6GT Nov 25 2008, 10:14 PM

Posted by: DBCooper Nov 25 2008, 10:18 PM

Incorrect? Don't think so, Jake. Part of my job is doing exactly that, and has been for the last twenty years.



Then "branded" as you're using the word would mean trademarked, and that's also intellectual property, but totally different than a patented innovation. So are you talking about this fellow actually using the RAT trademark on his parts? If that's it, and you've registered that trademark, then you would have a case.



Stromberg? Now THAT is something totally different. Sure, you can outspend someone else by showering them with lawsuits that everyone knows you would never win, but since it's so much cheaper for them to settle than to fight their counsel would suggest that they throw in the towel. That's legal bullying, and I guess you could call that a win if you like, but it's nothing to do with intellectual property or the merits of the case.



Then you need to file for patents on patentable innovations, but I'm sure your attorneys have already told you that. No patent, no trademark, then no intellectual property, and no basis for a lawsuit.

Len's earlier post had better explanations for why no one will be able to copy your products, and that's the "unapparent" technologies and processes. It takes time, skill, and experience to put together that sort of package, and no one will be able to duplicate that with just a CNC machine.

Reality check. Is there any real proof of any of this? Or is it all just hearsay and speculation?

Posted by: biosurfer1 Nov 25 2008, 10:45 PM

Not trying to stir the pot here, just trying to understand all of this since intellectual property is quite fascinating to me...

Jake is producing the heads based on the original Porsche heads with modifications he/Len have developed right?

Could Porsche have the same claim against Jake since he is making the heads on the CNC machine now?

How much does something have to be modified before its considered "different"...I believe a former boss of mine had this problem once when he tried to patent his idea, the patent office rejected it because it was "too easily modified" (I think that was the reasoning"

Posted by: DBCooper Nov 25 2008, 10:51 PM

Porsche would have a better claim against Jake than Jake would have against whoever is copying Jake's modifications, but since nothing in the whole chain is patentable no one would ever "win" anything in a lawsuit. Unless someone who has the deepest pockets decides it's worth their while to put someone else out of business.

Edit: Volkswagen would have a better claim, not Porsche.

Posted by: CliffBraun Nov 25 2008, 10:54 PM

He modifies original castings, or like original castings from another source.
I'd also believe that nothing in the Jake's (or Porsche's) would not be covered by some prior art.


This, too.

Posted by: LarryR Nov 25 2008, 11:32 PM

I was cloned and had my software engineering secrets mass produced and provided to the general public in the form of how to do X, Y, Z the right way.

Follow on actions included patenting my secret beer consumption methods, procrastination extrodinare skills for idiots was published, how to hang out on car forums 101 was blogged... F*&^% I was violated.

Eventually my slacker 101 skills took over the clone and he was rendered useless. He had an endless desire to improve his beer consumption skills and unplug his remote control flow.

S&*&^% then he married the same kind of woman I did and he sued my a$$ ... I was like WTF... The complaint was something along the lines of dishes, yard maintanence and work come before hobbies had caused him undue stress and were at odds with his ingrained natural instincts and it was all my fault!!!!

So I can sympothize but I figure just keep the lawyers out of it and settle it old school Let discretion be the determining factor in that.



It is assumed that it is realized that this is an attempt to make light of a serious situation in hopes of making one laugh to realize that life is too short to get to pissed off for to long ... If said disclaimer is not taken to heart reread... and if you dont laugh provide suggestions

Posted by: SirAndy Nov 26 2008, 12:10 AM

False!

I've been through this personally.
You can have a valid claim for "intellectual property" without a patent or trademark.

BTDT

Andy

Posted by: championgt1 Nov 26 2008, 12:12 AM

+1

Posted by: CliffBraun Nov 26 2008, 12:15 AM

Well, not to really argue this, but I assume you're talking about copyright, which isn't anything close to the issue here.

I also am curious about the fact that it now takes registration to view the original thread on Jake's site. I'm interested in more details, but do not really need another account.

Posted by: Chris Hamilton Nov 26 2008, 12:20 AM

I know the difference between actually breaking the law and suing someone in an attempt to bankrupt them from legal fees. You didn't mention a single real law being broken, you just keep making unfounded claims and talking about how badass your lawyers are.

Posted by: SirAndy Nov 26 2008, 12:25 AM

I never said that i was referring to Jake's case. I was simply pointing out that "DBCooper" made a comment that in itself is not true.

As you can see from my post, i was quoting "DBCooper" directly and did not refer to Jake at all ...
Andy

Posted by: NineOneFour Nov 26 2008, 12:30 AM

Not to worry, I went to register and recieved this message... "Sorry, registration has been disabled by the administrator."

Posted by: George H. Nov 26 2008, 12:41 AM

registration is down due to spammer attacks

Posted by: CliffBraun Nov 26 2008, 12:45 AM

Yeah, this is the sort of behavior I don't really appreciate in a potential supplier.

Oh, Andy, I didn't mean to say you were, just commenting to make it clear for people concerned about the legal aspect of this. I happen to have actually read current US copyright law.

Edit: removed obvious snark.

Posted by: Jake Raby Nov 26 2008, 04:38 AM

My forums have been closed to new registrations for 2 weeks now. We were seeing 500 spamer registrations per day and vbulletin doesn't have a "fix" for the issue yet and recommended that I kill registration while they work on a new patch.

All that matters is the fact that we have stopped this guy- ultimately that's all that matters.

Posted by: ArtechnikA Nov 26 2008, 06:08 AM

FWIW - it's widely believed (a belief CMW continues to promote) that 'the' D-shaped port for Porsche (probably just 911, haven't actually read the patent...) cylinder heads is patented.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3618/is_/ai_n8859459

Clearly there are forms of automotive industrial design that are protected and protectable.

Software duplication, CNC/CAM part cloning, and other intellectual ripoff techniques are just very poor form, practiced by the greedy and lazy.

Posted by: Cevan Nov 26 2008, 07:15 AM

It is highly unlikely that Porsche still has a patent on the 2 liter cyclinder head. It would have expired years ago. It's free for everyone to copy.

Posted by: DBCooper Nov 26 2008, 07:20 AM

Absolutely. But they're real innovations that "advance the art", meaning different and unique ways of doing things, and not subtle modifications of existing methods. Part of the "art" of getting a patent is convincing the examiner that what you're doing really advances the art. Subtly re-shaping a port wouldn't, while totally re-forming it into a D? Maybe? Evidently.

Edit: Funny, after writing that I went to the CB Performance site, because they used to sell a "mini-D" port head. It's not there, the port is extended a bit more and they're now called "wedge" ports. But a web search turns up hundreds of other "d-port" heads, modified and new, from lots of big companies. Evidently Pontiac was making "d-port" heads back in the Sixties. So that CMW patent may not cover what they represent it as covering, another little trick about "patented" products.

And yes, Andy, you're right. I was referring to patent related intellectual property and not thinking about other types. But if you just went through this then I'm sure your lawyer told you about good practice, always using that copyright phrase and using the TM symbol whenever you use a proprietary term. Those give you protection later if there's any doubt about origination. With mechanical innovations that good practice is a patent. If you don't have it, and if the item's been in commerce for a year without it, then it becomes public knowledge and there's no real protection.

Jake doesn't have a patent, or a patentable product, so this is really all about business ethics. Someone is rumored to be thinking about copying Len's good work. But head porting has always been art mixed with science. A CNC machine can get close, but like Len observed, it can't do it all. This is when good reputation counts.

Posted by: HAM Inc Nov 26 2008, 09:09 AM

Just for the record, our LE-180 design (so named because the intake ports will flow a minimum of 180CFM @ .500" valve lift) isn't an exact replica of the 2.0 914 head. The chambers are, but the ports themselves have a series of minor improvements that I used to do by hand. We also modernized them with better seat and guide materials and 12mm plug bosses. They aren't reproduced with factory emblems or part #'s. They are a hybrid of Porsche and HAM innovations. They sell okay, but the big movers are the LE-200's. All LE series heads are under constant development for better materials, proceedures etc., but the LE-200's are where the total package sees development. Those heads are my playground, so to speak. I enjoy the tweaking and the never ending battle to make them better and more technologically advanced. That's why I said, copy away. The LE-200's that this fellow wanted to copy have already been superseded, anyway!

Posted by: Chris Hamilton Nov 26 2008, 09:35 AM

I think in the world of racing parts this is typically the case, innovation is what keeps the copycats behind you on the track.

Anyone who has the confidence that they provide a superior service does not need to resort to legal tactics, because even if this guy copies them, he may not have the reputation to sell them.

Posted by: Joe Owensby Nov 26 2008, 10:22 AM

I agree. Getting into the patent world is pretty messy and expensive. We recently spent over $3million in outside legal fees to fight a lawsuit by a competitor- all over something as minor as notches in a food tray. But, it was a $70million per year business, so it was worth the fight. We won, and ended up making the company that sued us pay the legal fees, plus we obtained the rights to their patent. A quick look on the US patent site, USPTO.gov for "cylinder and head and valve" gives 747 patents that include these terms. I would imagine if someone took the time to review all of these in detail, both the body and the claims, they would find about anything there is to do with cylinder heads. This is for patents that pertain to products or functions. Trademarks or copyrights are another thing, but are harder to enforce on things other than appearance.

Jake and Len have the reputation of high technology development, great customer support as well as good quality systems and components. This reputation will support their sales which will allow further development to keep them ahead of copycats. For example, my decision topurchase one of their kits was based entirely on good comments on the 914 world board, and I was well pleased with what I got.

I think it is also great of them to share tidbits of technical information on the boards to help educate us on issues with the type IV engines, items such as proper oil, head cracking issues, new engine develpments etc.

This being the Thanksgiving season, thanks guys. JoeO

Posted by: DBCooper Nov 26 2008, 10:33 AM

Try the Google http://www.google.com/patents?hl%5bb, it's really good. Lots better than the patent office's ancient software.

Posted by: Jake Raby Nov 26 2008, 10:33 AM

Very correct, unless they are used in complete engines that could then be similarly prepared to some of our offerings.

I certainly agree with Len, that there are preparation aspects of the heads that can't be replicated but "confusingly similar" components could be created and that could be damaging.

What matters most is the processes were halted and now enough people are aware of the efforts that it'll be hard for anoyone to have a successful endeavor, even if they copied the heads, no matter what may go on in court.

Our following is large and they are loyal, due to that the people will be more effective than anything that can happen in court.

I am trying to create positive energy from all of this, especially with the Holidays upon us. In some ways having things copied can be the biggest pat on the back that can be given to a developer.

Posted by: r_towle Nov 26 2008, 11:16 AM

I would agree with you that its a strong compliment to be copied.
The go to market model needs to be superior and a new start up would need time to gain market share and mind share.

This is how a lot of the high tech hardware companies work...very little is secret, companies change (buy and steal) employees all the time to gain knowledge...its really not a secret world full of unique ideas anymore...

In the security business the weakest link is the human factor....its cheaper to buy the information than try to steal it.

Its all about who has a more efficient go to market model...period.

The only way to stay ahead in through constant and continuing innovation.
If you have a patent or would like to become an IP company then that is a different business model.

I would suggest that instead of fighting directly, do look into IP companies that ALL THEY DO is baby sit IP and take a skim from any proceeds that occur as a result of legal battles... This is an industry unto itself.

The benefit of outsourcing this type of work is that you now have a specialist that is monitoring your trademarks, copywrites, patents etc 24/7/365.
This frees you up to remain totally focused on making a profit from your business.


Rich

Posted by: Jake Raby Nov 26 2008, 12:05 PM

Correct.
We find it funny that the same day we found out about this we had just released the 5th Generation of the LE series heads with a new and more improved tool patyh and with enhanced structural integrity.

The heads the guy wanted to copy were only 6 months old, but were two generations behind our current offering.

Posted by: ONTHEGRIND Nov 26 2008, 12:10 PM

You should have never created this thread...
If I was having some sort of problems last thing I'd want is it on the INTERNET..

Posted by: LarryR Nov 26 2008, 12:14 PM

I would argue the opposite if you want to point out the culprit and discourage use of their products.

However, I have read every part of this thread and would not know the person to avoid...

Posted by: HAM Inc Nov 26 2008, 12:19 PM

Yep... I just finished my lunch and now I'm about to bag up the first of the new generation LE-200's. Nothing Earth shattering, just a few improvements to make them tougher for the abuse that some of these heads are getting exposed too. I am proud to say that none of the LE heads produced to date have suffered a failure of any kind. These latest improvements should help keep it that way.

I have noticed that the torque generated by Jakes powerplants keeps inching up. That puts more strain on the heads... so the development must continue! These latest mods were done in part to prepare for the ungodly cams and spring pressures that Jakes roller cam development is sure to toss at them. I fully expect that he will push the limits with grinds that he knows won't see the public light of day, but are geared toward judging the integrity of the components (plus he really enjoys breaking things! ) If I can keep heads from coming apart in those conditions... well that should be enough for anyone, at least for nowLOL!

Posted by: ONTHEGRIND Nov 26 2008, 12:25 PM

I am curious to know how they were trying to copy the cylinder heads more then reading harsh threats..


How was heads being copyied did they digitize the cylinder head for production ?
A CNC cylinder head is only as good as the hand porter that is desinging the port right ?

Posted by: r_towle Nov 26 2008, 12:39 PM

Not to change the subject, but I know both Jake and Len are reading this specific post...

This is a really interesting thread, I for one would love to hear your opinions on this discussion regarding valve adjustments.

http://www.914world.com/bbs2/index.php?showtopic=90307

Rich

Posted by: Thomas J Bliznik Nov 26 2008, 12:51 PM

Hi All,

I really enjoy these posts. Very interesting & informative.

Inquiring minds would like to know something for the record.

We hear about these LE heads (new) generation of improvements?? Is this based on dyno results?? Customer feedback?? Or failure rates?? I would like an explaination of the process so we understand these claims. This is not a criticism, but a technical question.

Tom

Posted by: ericread Nov 26 2008, 01:06 PM

Aaaaaarg. There be thread pirates lurking...



Eric

Posted by: Jake Raby Nov 26 2008, 01:16 PM

Tom,
The changes are made based on all things you have mentioned above. As we experience more and more and I test different engines with various changes that Len works on with the CNC tool path we find new powewr and new longevity/ reliability as a byproduct.

The changes from the first genberation of LE 200 heads to the latest are vast, but some of them are not able to even be noted by the human eye, and some of them only Len knows.

Len makes changes based on flow data from each batch of heads as well as the feedback and data that I supply to him as we assemble and ytest LE equipped engines. Thats where we have the winning team, we use what we are seling and thoroughly understand it- thats why when you had issues I found them hard to believe.

The overall goal for Len is to leave as much material in the port to support the seats, but also attain the best flow characteristics, this is what has been refined more than anything.

FWIW we have NEVER experienced a failure with any LE cylinder head, there are no "failure rates" at the present time. In fact I have never experienced a cylinder head related failure in the entire time that Len has been prepping my heads and thats including some engines that should have failed and some that were on the edge so badly that we expected them to fail.

There are over 150 pair of LE heads in service right now all over the World, to date we have had ONE complaint. ONE.

BTW- I didn't start this thread, as someone suggested above. i started a thread on my private forums that was migrated here- not by me.

Posted by: brer Nov 26 2008, 01:34 PM

I was thinking about this exact thing and was also wanting comment on the difference between an exact digital reproduction of a head and a head that was independently designed incorporating data observed from one or multiple different example of other heads.

The other day I was looking at a collection of port shapes cast from exceptionally ported dragster heads. All of these were tagged and documented and used regularly for reference and study by the person who owned them. Some were taken from blown heads but he also paid good money for alot of the heads they came from. I'm sure if you looked at this persons work you would find elements of other peoples work, which in itself is not unethical in any way. The ideas and techniques may have been individual in application but were definitely not unique to any one port or designer.

Pulling a casting of a port is the way head porting people have done it for years. Its part of the process and is totally in line with the experimental and creative aspects of the work. Digital information is now part of the creative process and I think its fair to extend the practice of casting along with current working methods that utilize the new technology. This is something that already exists within the art of porting.

Taking a silicon casting of a port or digitizing it are the same thing, basically 'COPYING" someones port. But to then take and apply that information wholesale to a product for sale in my opinion is the real ethical transgression, not the casting.

Any head porters want to dispute this? I would like to hear your thoughts.


Of course those who race guard their designs fiercly, but this is the nature of the sport. On the other hand, to offer something for sale publicly means any expectation for secrecy is relinquished and the designer doesn't have any right to attack someone who learns from their work and applies that knowledge.


Duplicating a head for profit is different.

Thats my opinoin as a designer and while I morally agree that their work should not be "carbon copied" and offered for sale I also see a potential for the community to respond in ways that could unfairly affect others in the feild.


What would you think if a new CNC Type 4 head was offered next month? Despite havine zero proof of anything I think I know what my first thought would be. This kinda bugs me and makes me think more details are needed.

Posted by: Twise Nov 26 2008, 01:37 PM

I would have just beat his ass. Take care Jake...

Posted by: biosurfer1 Nov 26 2008, 01:55 PM

Because that would be easy to explain to the judge...

Judge: "and why did you assault Mr. X?"
Jake: "because he said he was going to copy my head design"

I think it would go downhill from there for Jake

Posted by: Jake Raby Nov 26 2008, 02:17 PM

I'd think we'd have to release something that would kick it's ass.

We already have it.

And it would have to be proven. We had a solid year of data from the LE heads on our engines before the first unit was sold to a paying customer. The very first set that were completed were used on my 3,450 mile R&D excursion in early 2006 where we gathered 2Gb of data logs and 75 pages of "pilot's notes". See some of the data at www.aircooledtechnology.com/crosscountry

Posted by: Phoenix 914-6GT Nov 26 2008, 02:24 PM

I cannot log on and read Jakes forum since I am not a member. All I see here is a bunch of random ramblings that say nothing about what this guy was going to do. Sure would be nice to know what was really going on. All I see is Jake coming off looking poorly with what is shown here and I would like to think differently.

Posted by: Jake Raby Nov 26 2008, 02:34 PM

So, someone gets poor reviews when they take up for themselves and the things that they and their network create?

And remember: I started a thread on my private forums, not here. It never belonged here and it still doesn't.

At the present time there are complications involved with more definitive postings, we'll share details when the time is right and when it can be done without sacrifice.

Posted by: Phoenix 914-6GT Nov 26 2008, 02:40 PM

But Jake, you are a business man who makes a great product and has a gift to do amazing things. When you come on here and don't say anything other than how great your lawyers are and that they will take care of it for you without even saying what the issue is just seems assholish. You have people on here trying to guess as to what actually happened without even telling them right or wrong. I see you created the thread on your private forum, but I cannot get in so I guess unless you explain it here I will never understand.

Posted by: Jake Raby Nov 26 2008, 03:10 PM

The problem is simple. Someone has tried to replicate our heads. We stopped them. We are doing everything possible to ensure this doesn't happen again.

Thats all that needs to be said here.

I appreciate the compliments, and I really am not trying to be an asshole- even though I am sure it comes across that way here on the board.

I have ots going on right now as we are in the middle of a 3,500 square foot shop expansion (that I am doing myself) on top of the normal crazy season we are having, couple that to the fact that Excelence just featured our M96 engine work and then throw in the fact that my dad just got home from a week in the Hospital with Pneumonia and top it with this issue...

To say the least I am on edge, plus I have a damn cold and feel like shit, but I was here at 0445 this morning... To say the least, this thread is the last thing I need to worry about. Thats why I posted this on MY forums, where people that appreciate what we create hang out.

Posted by: CliffBraun Nov 26 2008, 03:10 PM

Jake, you seem to have a decent product line, but the way you conduct yourself here is embarrassing.

You're essentially agreeing, at this point, with the positions of people you called smart-asses on the previous pages. You withhold information that's of very limited use to anyone, and would seem to make your position stronger here, with your potential customers.

I also enjoy that you've just stated that your current products are not your best work, should we all wait until you release your new killer heads before buying?

If I were you I'd realize that your reputation is a large part of your product and that even if someone were to make an exact replica of your product, they would have a hard time selling it to the community. I would also consider how much value the good will of the community has. Coca Cola has (or until recently had) goodwill of customers listed as a BILLION dollar asset on their balance sheet.

Further, I'm still waiting on supertrapp results in the other thread, I'm somewhat suspect of you posting information after this thread has dropped off the front page, as a result.

I'd just focus on improving my work and let the people copy it, they'll be so far behind it won't matter. I could take a casting of the heads I had ported for my engine and all I would do is kinda amuse the guy who did them.

Posted by: 96740 Nov 26 2008, 03:11 PM

+1 ------------ I tried to register to read for myself but regisration has been disabled.

Posted by: ArtechnikA Nov 26 2008, 03:23 PM

Next year's computer / TV / Porsche / camera / refrigerator will be better than this year's. All successful companies have continuous product improvement programs.

You buy when you perceive that the value of the product offered matches your need.

Posted by: Jake Raby Nov 26 2008, 03:23 PM

I detailed why registration has been disabled for the past 2 weeks in a post this morning- Its due to 500 spammers a day invading the site, so many that I could not control it and it's happening to other forums using the same software.



Lets clarify something:

What we sell today is the most proven and most effective and most understood offering. Its something that we can dictate tuning for and something that we fully understand. We must understand it before we can support it, if not we'd be like 95% of the other TIV sources, just selling parts that they don't work with.

My Turn Key engines always have and always will get the most updated components. This is for many reasons, but primarily so we can observe them first hand and learn about them prior to releasing them to individuals. This holds true for cylinder heads as well as other components likeour roller cams and lifters that are available in turn key engines at the present, but not in kits or as individual items available through my store..

Anyone who is waiting for us to create the most killer head on the planet will be waiting a while, as we constantly alter things and try to make them better. Ten years ago I was lucky if a 2270 made 140 HP, today that same engine makes 190HP, runs cooler and gets better MPG. Its a process of evolution that we have gone through over time.

The fact is that no matter if the head that was to be replicated is 1 week old technology or 10 year old technology, we still must do what we can to secure it. The other fact is that even though this head is 6+ months old and has been superseded its still better than ANYTHING commercially available based on the TIV casting.

As far as the Supertrapp thread goes- after the crap that was stirred from this thread I won't dare post anything that could stir a debate here for a long time. I simply don't have the time for it.

Posted by: davep Nov 26 2008, 03:46 PM

I'm almost sorry I started the thread. I intended the word to get out, and the watch extended.
To those that want to dis Jake at every opportunity, go start your own damn thread and don't hijack mine.
I DEVELOP my own parts and services, so I relate well with what Jake & Len are facing.

Posted by: Phoenix 914-6GT Nov 26 2008, 03:56 PM

Don'tmiss understand my stance. I am happy for what Jake is doing and hope to have a 914 with one of his engines someday. Since there are not any new members being accepted at this point it was difficult for any of us outsiders, who do like to hear about MassIVe, to really know what was going on. And though Jake has a lot on his plate his answers were short and agressive making him look bad. I understand why know after he told what he has going on.

I know Jake has many who oppose his work but I wish he would post more about what he has going on here. I really don't go to any other forum as this is the place that interests me and has the peole I enjoy talking to. Everyone has those who try to talk them down but the MassIVe success speaks clearly for itself.

Posted by: CliffBraun Nov 26 2008, 03:58 PM

It's really not at every opportunity, just when he's inordinately full of it.

I've made some custom parts for my 914, and I'm in engineering, so I also understand what he's facing, but I'd rather just make the community aware of the issue and let them decide than threaten. Or I will patent my patentable processes.

Speaking of which, Who is this asshole, Jake? I know you've stopped him, but I'm sure there are enough people who feel that's not right to prevent him from having the resources for an attempt in the future.

Posted by: 96740 Nov 26 2008, 04:05 PM

Understood. I'm on a couple of forums that make you register with a "REAL" e-mail address. No more Hotmail, Yahoo or GMail.

Posted by: Phoenix 914-6GT Nov 26 2008, 04:09 PM

Hmmmmm... that's all I have is a yahoo and hotmail account.

Posted by: brer Nov 26 2008, 04:22 PM

Yep, i have no doubt you could.

Posted by: HAM Inc Nov 26 2008, 04:31 PM

Wow! How you drew that conclusion is a bit of a mystery to me, as is the controversy that has erupted over this.
Actually what Jake and I said is that due to constant development, no matter how incremental, our current product represents our state of the art for that moment in time. It in no way infers that our previous work is inferior, much less defective in some way. It only implies that it is not as developed as our present offerings.

When I was told that someone had wished to borrow one of my heads to copy, I was a bit amused. But let me tell you that passed pretty quickly. This isn't a game to me. I have a mortgage, bills, and responsibilities just like everyone else. The only source of income I have to pay those bills is cylinderhead work. I have busted my ass to put myself in a position where I can make a decent living doing something I love. I am nothing but grateful to have Jake on the lookout for me, as I am not the best at that sort of thing. And in the long run everyone whho may one day wish to purchase state of the art cylinderheads should be too. Do you really think that someone who would just copy another guys work is going to be committed to R&D? If the market gets flooded with knock offs I will have no choice but to redirect my focus to another market. Don't want to sound arrogant (I'm actually a pretty humble guy!), but I just don't see anyone else pushing themselves to produce the best heads possible out there.

I had a plan before I started this business. The plan was based on my belief that there was a market for superior value added service in the aircooled cylinderhead business. Ofcourse I knew that plenty of other shops are more than capable of throwing seats and guides at castings and shoving them out the door. To succeed I would have to have a healthy committment to R&D and pour every resource I had (have) back into the business. I have been doing that for over 1o years now, so it is natural that I would be proud of the fact that my head technology has advanced to such a high state. It is also natural that I would want to guard my trade secrets. Jumping down Jakes throat for being aggressive in his defense of these secrets is a bit obnoxious in my opnion. Jake has played a HUGE role in the development of the heads. All of the tricks are mine, but all of the feedback comes from him. For that reason the LE heads are only available through the T4Store. Which means that Jake has a stake in them too.

Yes, it's true that Jake is blunt, frank and sometimes comes off as an asshole. But the fact is he's a nice guy who just doesn't like being crossed. Some folks shrug off being , even at their own expence. Not Jake, and I respect that.

Without Jake paving the way there would be a huge void in my business and the overall development of T4's that so many board members now take for granted. Make no mistake, the 914 (as is the conversion market, and now the Boxster market ) is much better off for his efforts. Consider this; even our competition knows where to look for the cream of the crop.
Damn! I can't believe I just typed that much!

Posted by: DBCooper Nov 26 2008, 04:34 PM

This has been blown WAY out of proportion. From what I read SOMEONE said "Could I buy a head so I could copy it? Hardy har har."

That's it, nothing more. Probably just a bad joke, like the ones you restrain yourself from blurting out in airport security. It's the wrong thing to say at the wrong time to the wrong person, so instead of getting a laugh we now have a full season's worth of drama.

Posted by: Jake Raby Nov 26 2008, 04:48 PM

My forum is not new, it has over 3,000 members and has been open for almost 3 years. I created it so i could have a place to post things that tout what we do without having to fight the bullshit on other forums when people think we are beating our chests. Thats why I stopped posting critical information on other forums, or giving out technical advice that could be argued with.

A few years ago I had some time to argue, today I don't as I am here at 0500 and don't leave till 7-8 PM at best most days and still don't accomplish all my tasks.

At any rate, this will be my final post in this thread - I have a second floor to finish in my new shop (classrooms) and need to have positive momentum this entire weekend to get it completed. The Aircooled University will be in session in Summer 09 and I have lots to do before that!

Posted by: SirAndy Nov 26 2008, 05:11 PM

It's called "progress" ...

You should try it some day.
Andy

Posted by: tod914 Nov 26 2008, 05:47 PM

It's great to see people as passionate about their work as you and Len.
Keep up the good work guys, and thanks for your contributions to the community.

Posted by: Rob Ways Nov 26 2008, 05:47 PM

In almost every industry, designs get "improved" with the help of attys. Len and Jake have a right to fight it and make us aware that an attempt to steal their work has been made.

If you don't already know this, no one makes a ton of money with 914s because the volume is not there. As a group we need to protect vendors who put their heart, soul, time and effort into our cars. I believe in Jake and Len's work and I believe they've earned our respect through their work. I want to know who the not so clever copy cat is, so I can steer clear, but even if I don't know who it is, I'm loyal to the real 914 members and vendors who do care about us and our cars. No matter the cost.

We all have heard stories about 914 members helping other members, donating in times of need, and building a real community. Jake and Len are a very important and knowledgable part of our community and we should ALL respect that. Now is the time to lend some of our support.

Posted by: davep Nov 26 2008, 06:56 PM

Then you had better go back and read from the horse's mouth.
"he asked the caller why he wanted to see one, he replied that he wanted to BORROW one for replication"
That is the lowest level of IP theft!

Posted by: DBCooper Nov 26 2008, 08:08 PM

It's not possible to go back an re-read the thread now because the link won't let you into those forums. But this whole story smells funny. So tell me since I can't re-read it, who was the "he" who asked "the caller"? And who was the caller? A competitor? Or was it just some yahoo on the phone making sarcastic joke? Do you know? Does Jake?

If somebody asked me a stupid question like "why do you want to see it?" [when I might want to see it before I bought it just because it costs so much] I might make some stupid sarcastic remark too. So what exactly was the story? Did anything happen at all? Or is all this just pointless drama because someone was trying to make a funny?

Posted by: r_towle Nov 26 2008, 08:38 PM

DB...
For whatever reason you seem to have a hair accross your ass about this.
For legal reasons, no one should need to know who this person is, or have the ability to slander this person during the investigation and legal proceedings...

DB...legal rules would allow this person to get away with it and accuse Jake/Len of something worse in the process just so YOU get to know who it is.
Dont take that the wrong way, but please think about what you are asking and the consequences to Jake and Len...

This issue is being dealt with by Jake and Len...it was posted here so that if and when you happen to see heads that are copies that may or may not pop up on Ebay some day....you might remember.

It was posted by a client, not by Jake. Both Jake and Len came here to explain and defend their business practices...they did not come here for your approval or judgement on the case.

IP law and the protection of IP, including tradmemarks like VW , Beetle, Porsche has been going on for ages...nothing wrong with a business standing up for its rights.

Rich

Posted by: Chris Hamilton Nov 26 2008, 08:55 PM

For it to be "intellectual property" don't you need to prove that it belongs to you and not anyone else? ( i.e. patent it ?)

Posted by: r_towle Nov 26 2008, 09:27 PM

I am not a lawyer.
I do know however that there are alot of views of IP and quite a few laws regarding IP and how its supported by the legal system...be it a process, a product, copy rights, trademarks, all of these are property.

Rich

Posted by: George H. Nov 26 2008, 09:43 PM

Rich

DB/ Paul Illick always has a hair up his ass for Jake

just because you change your screen name doesn't mean you get a fresh start

reading DB (Illick )/ jake is like reading Grant /jake it just gets old

Posted by: SirAndy Nov 26 2008, 11:09 PM

Sure, but neither Len nor Jake need to prove anything to *YOU* ...

So, legally, it's perfectly fine that they refrain from giving any information on the subject in a public forum.

I know your beef with Jake, so i know where you're coming from ...
Andy

Posted by: Chris Hamilton Nov 26 2008, 11:16 PM

I was asking in a purely hypothetical sense, but hey it's your forum if you don't want me asking.

Posted by: ArtechnikA Nov 27 2008, 05:14 AM

OK - as long as we're talking generalities, the short answer is no.

For it to be -your- intellectual property, you will need to prove it belongs to you in order to prevail in legal action.

It's always IP, so it's not a matter of when does it become such - it becomes such at the moment of conception. It's a matter of ownership, and that's quite a different matter, especially as there are different forms of protection available depending on the form of the IP.

*generally* - you can patent a 'thing' which (as originally conceived) means you can charge others a fee (the royalty) for the reproduction of the thing. (It was not intended as a means of granting you the exclusive right to manufacture, but that is its current effect.) And patent history is rife with people who were able to patent someone else's idea first, thereby gaining legal ownership of the rights. And there are even lots of cases where multiple people, working completely independently, came up with the same ideas at essentially the same time. (These are almost exclusively from the pre-Internet-universally connected days. I don't think there are many patents filed these days by people working completely independently...)

In today's world, tho, the patent process exposes many details to the public, and producing an actual product does the same. What if your factory has a special widget-making machine that uses some unique process by which it's possible for you to make widgets cheaper, faster, and better than any one else? Is there protection for that? Sure - it's called 'trade secret' and the thing is - you must treat it as secret. Label the files - put measure in place to make sure they do not escape - make everyone who sees the material sign nondisclosure statements...

(As long as we're talking hypothetical generalities, here's a HYPOTHETICAL drawn from the material in this thread. Suppose you have a cylinder head that's just a normal production-car cylinder head. But you have a machining process using post-industrial dilithium crystals and a coolant bath of hummingbird spit that lets you cut valve seats in one second. You don't patent that process because you never plan to mass-product the machine, and if the secret were out, every one would do it. Treat it like a secret, and if some one steals the idea, you have a cause of action.) I gather that there is an element of this in play here.

Copyright protects 'an expression.' A picture - a painting - a story. It's the property of the maker the moment it's made. Currently I believe the duration of a copyright is life of the maker plus 75 years, but it's changed several times through the years. But it is the expression that is protected - not the idea. You may feel "Romeo and Juliet" was a shameless ripoff of "West Side Story" but most would agree the difference is in the telling...

Copyrights are fairly easy to give away, unfortunately, especially in these Internet days, and I am not qualified to post specifics. Suffice to say that it's probably best to display the copyright you claim along with the material you want protected. There are levels of copyright protection that involve government registration of interest of serious, professional generators of protectable content - photographers, writers, musicians - like that. Way beyond the scope of this thread...

Trademark and servicemark exist to give you the (more or less) exclusive right to a word or phrase to identify your product. e.g. - Porsche claims 'visual trademark' on the unique shapes of (most of) their cars, including 911 and 928 (but not 914...). Some things (like numbers...) can't be trademarked, which is why the "next generation" of Intel computer processor, following the 8086. 80186, 80286, 80386, and 80486 was - ta da - 'Pentium.' (AMD was starting to use "x86" numbering...) And yes, we all know the '911' isn't a '901' because Peugeot complained about the "middle zero." French laws are different...

And you can't get a registered trademark on everyday words with common meanings. Like "Windows." (OK, bad example...)

Lots of technical products have *multiple layers* of protectable IP. A computer chip may have a patentable circuit implemented with a patented ion deposition process using a patented combination of rare gasses making a computer with copyrighted fabrication layout graphics and schematics and principals of operation, with a trade-secret fabrication foundry machine resulting in a part with a trademarked name.

Of course, this is all an existential and legal issue.

Something _is_ intellectual property as soon as it's created.
It _might be_ yours legally, unless someone else files to protect it first (and they had a right to do so, meaning they came by the material legitimately). It doesn't have to be yours for you to claim it's yours, which is when the lawyers get involved...

You don't have to file for any kind of government protection for IP to *be* yours, but in many cases it strengthens your position (a lot). Like many rights, they can be lost or given away. If you don't act like you want something protected, generally, your protections will be lost. (This thread is about Jake and Len acting like they want their stuff protected.)

Posted by: DBCooper Nov 27 2008, 07:53 AM

Fine, Rich, so pages and pages of discussion, on this and other forums, and I ask, did this really happen as it's been presented? Or is it possible someone was just making a stupid joke and this has all been totally blown out of proportion? I don't need names or even really care who it was, what I'd like to know is if there's any actual proof, or is this all just hearsay? Is this phone conversation by other people being remembered and then reported verbatim? Was this "other party" even really a competitor? Or just some random yahoo? Important details, like for example did the guy laugh after he asked if he could "borrow" the head?

Serious question. Look, people look at their competitor's products all the time, and that's normal. You think Jake and Len don't look at the work of other head porters? EVERYONE does it and it doesn't mean a thing. So what's the problem? Is there one? Really? And more, why would another head porter, someone who has the means, need to "borrow" a head? Why wouldn't he just buy one? Online, T4 Store, no questions asked? Buy it and return it if he was strapped. Even more important, if this mysterious guy on the line really had bad intentions, then why ON EARTH would he announce them like that? There are a hundred simple explanations he could have given, like he wanted to show it to a customer, show it to his wife before he paid $1000 for it, see if it matched the one he bought on e-bay, whatever.

Excuse me, but this story doesn't make any sense unless it was just someone making a stupid sarcastic joke. Is it being negative to notice that Jake is prone to exaggerate? The stupid joke explanation makes a lot more sense than believing that a thief would call you on the phone to ask if you'd help him rob you.

There is no intention to slam anyone, and in re-reading things I don't think anyone HAS been slammed. But for this amount of drama I have to think there are a lot of questions that haven't been answered. Or even asked.

Oh, and Happy Thanksgiving, everybody.

Posted by: HAM Inc Nov 27 2008, 10:18 AM

DB the info came to me from a credible source. A customer who has supported many 914 vendors over the years with actual purchases. He is also a regular here on the board, and active in the 914 community. He is staunch supporter of the community at large and loves 914's. He has never been a drama queen on the boards, and to my knowledge has never penned a single controversial thread. He is a successful professional with better things to do with his time, and nothing to gain by fabricating a tale like this. He too was astonished that this guy made such a request. And for the record the guy didn't acknowledge his motives right away. Our customer at first assumed that that the reason the guy wanted to borrow a pair of heads was to try them out. He told the guy that there was no way he was going to let him install and run his heads. That's when the fellow revealed that he wasn't going to install them, he just wanted to digitize them. Our freind then alerted me when I phoned him to talk about a order he had in my shop.

Now I'll admit that we haven't had our people properly vett our customer. Which means he could be a flaming idealogue with an agenda to create much drama for no good reason. I suppose it's possible, but...well... actually I don't think it's possible.

It's my hunch that there is really nothing more to read into the story than what I just wrote, which is about all that any of us know at this point. Simply put, a shop out there that is not all that plugged in to the community at large, (but is aware of it) made a sloppy effort to put there hands on a pair of our heads so they could copy them. True, it's not Watergate, but this our little world, and my and Jakes livelyhoods are tied to our ability to stay at east one step ahead of our competition. Excuse us if we react to something like this a bit heavy handed. And don't forget that we didn't post this here, and we didn't turn the thread into a inquisition of our motives.

Over the years I have had samples of work from every major aircooled shop in the country and many that I never heard of and even more that I never knew the source, land on one of my work benches for service. In some cases the work came to me before it was even installed! I have NEVER sought a competitors work to copy or even get ideas from. I will freely admit to copying my dads work, and more than specific work to copying his philosophy regarding many ICE specifics. He has told me that he doesn't mind.

I have been impressed with some of the work of my competitors. And I have been severely underwhelmed by others. I have had work from what I would consider my biggest competitor on my flow bench and was surprised and pleased to find that his 48mm valved T4 intake port flowed CONSIDERABLY less than our LE-200 44mm port! I don't make a big public display out of it, but it sures makes me feel warm and gushy inside!

Most of the high theory advancement and new ideas that come to me from other sources come from my associations with V8 circle track engine builders. I have a close knit circle of very successful regional race engine builders. Since we are old freinds and not in competition with each other on or off the track, we really enjoy our high minded discussions and sharing with each other our latest observations and discoveries. Sometimes it's new and faster tooling, methods, more durable materials, and sometimes it's very specific performance enhancing innovations. I don't look to the aircooled head guys for ideas. So far I've been able to glean any info I've needed from my dad, my circle of fellow engine builders or Jake. And ofcourse I'll be the first to admit that I am a devotee of Smokey Yunick, Joe Mondello, and Jim Fueling among others. I tap into the SAE library and have read many papers on combustion, induction and exhaust theory. I keep myself informed. I do not and have never copied someone elses aircooled cylinderhead work. I have been inspired by others work, but copy, no.
And one last thing. As shitty as it would be to buy a guys work and copy it, at least the vendor would have gotten something from the asshole. To just borrow the guys work to copy... Damn! At lest give a reach around if your going to a guy!
Happy T-Giving everyone! Even you DB!

Posted by: Phoenix 914-6GT Nov 27 2008, 12:16 PM

Len, thanks for writing all that. It really helps put into perspective as to what actually happened.

Even though you didn't make it a point to get anything from your competitors work or try to copy it I would be surprised if it didn't spark an idea or two from seeing something they did or didn't do. Plus all your studies of what has been done throughout time helps but it is studying something someone else came out with. Now I don't know much about machining or what it means to digitize something but even though this guy comes across as someone with illintentions he may have just wanted to study it. However, I too would take steps to make sure it didn't go beyond the guy trying to further his knowledge.

Have a great Thanksgiving as well.

Posted by: stepuptotheMike Nov 27 2008, 01:03 PM

Geez guys. Go eat some turkey and drink some scotch. Passion is a good thing, but no need to throw accusations back and forth.

Hope everyone has a happy Thanksgiving and realize how fortunate we all are.

Mike

Posted by: DBCooper Nov 28 2008, 07:46 AM

Thanks, Len, excellent and levelheaded explanation. Much easier to understand the issues when there are more facts and less drama.

I still think it strange and incredibly stupid that any competitor would admit to that. Boggles the mind, but if that's the level of the "competition" then I don't think you have all that much to worry about.

Posted by: KaptKaos Nov 28 2008, 12:47 PM

It's not too hard to fathom actually. The copycat may have thought that the guy with the heads is a friend. How else would he have known that the guy had a set of Len's heads?

Obviously, the fellow with the heads thinks otherwise.

Posted by: RJMII Nov 28 2008, 01:10 PM

Len, that was really well put.

Posted by: DBCooper Nov 28 2008, 06:49 PM

Darwin Awards candidate.