OK JETJOE AGAIN BUT A GREAT THING
05-01-2005, 09:02 PM
#426
Banned
My Feedback: (119)
RE: OK JETJOE AGAIN BUT A GREAT THING
ORIGINAL: Treadstone21
ET..?...This is rather out of character..
ORIGINAL: EASYTIGER
Ah, skip it.
Ah, skip it.
It was about the "little birdie told me so but wants to remain anonymous" post...that kind of thing is an old internet saw, "all will be revealed, just wait!" and it bothers me...but I just ain't up for it tonight!
Have fun! Slash and burn! Take no prizners! Scorched earth!
But YOU have to carry the torch for a bit, not me!
05-03-2005, 03:28 PM
#427
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: East Falmouth, MA,
MA
Posts: 440
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: OK JETJOE AGAIN BUT A GREAT THING
Re any USA model GT manufacturers(?)......AMT USA certainly is....by any definition.
Ray Davis
AMT USA Field Rep
Ray Davis
AMT USA Field Rep
09-27-2009, 06:24 PM
#428
Junior Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Staten Island,
NY
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: OK JETJOE AGAIN BUT A GREAT THING
Look everyone knows right from wrong, in my 20 years of being aware, not counting my first five years of life, I haven’t met a single soul that can honestly say they don’t. My thing is that the RC world is exploding but at a very slow pace because, people who want to get involve just don’t have the money to do it. When it come to buying a good well made reliable turbine engine for a hobby or feeding oneself and paying bills for a few months or putting money in savings or a lot of people go with the latter.
I don’t know if JJ copied Wren, what I do know is that it is wrong to profit from another man hard work. But enough said I hope the hobby get a savior soon. And by savior I mean more manufactures who can produce reliable engines at low cost to open the market for the millions sitting on the sideline to join in and enjoy the thrill of turbine flight. 2000 thousand plus dollars is a lot of money for the majority of people to invest in this hobby despite the quality of the engines out there today.
I keep hoping that soon and real soon, turbine engines can be available at a reasonable price for more people to join the hobby. Maybe I’m hoping too much if it don’t happen soon then I’m afraid that only people with a lot of cash or people with $ to spare or those few who have no worries and are willing to spend large amount will continue to join this hobby.
[8D]
I don’t know if JJ copied Wren, what I do know is that it is wrong to profit from another man hard work. But enough said I hope the hobby get a savior soon. And by savior I mean more manufactures who can produce reliable engines at low cost to open the market for the millions sitting on the sideline to join in and enjoy the thrill of turbine flight. 2000 thousand plus dollars is a lot of money for the majority of people to invest in this hobby despite the quality of the engines out there today.
I keep hoping that soon and real soon, turbine engines can be available at a reasonable price for more people to join the hobby. Maybe I’m hoping too much if it don’t happen soon then I’m afraid that only people with a lot of cash or people with $ to spare or those few who have no worries and are willing to spend large amount will continue to join this hobby.
[8D]
09-27-2009, 10:26 PM
#429
My Feedback: (6)
RE: OK JETJOE AGAIN BUT A GREAT THING
C
Curtis,
I hate to say it......But this is the first time you have presented a logical well thought out agruement. It wasn't just a rant. Well done.
And, from some of the people I have talked to....your right.....Wren and others all started as part of the GTBA, then went their own ways. And, I am told, WREN and others, were not 'perfect' at the beginning. Users, distributors, and others provided feedback to improve the product. So, is it truly theirs alone? I really can't say. I am an engineer not a lawyer. But, in my field, it is call normal practice of the art. Using the learning and advise of others to make things better and cheaper. That 'Art' knowledge is normally considered 'public domain'. Again, my understanding is that you have to file patents and commercial design registrations to calim ownership. THEN, DEFEND THEM IN COURT. A tough and long task.
Dave
ORIGINAL: EASYTIGER
Didn't know people were ''keeping score''. Is this, what, Kentucky versus the United Kingdom? Seems like an awful lot of posters from Kentucky, and an awful lot from the UK. Go figure.
I can see nobody answered the question about who actually pays a license to WREN. Seems kind of an important question, being that some aspersions are being a-casted.
For that matter, who is Wren paying licensing to? Nobody? I would tend to think that most of their ''discoveries'' were actually discovered (at great expense) already by people such as Ohain, Whittle, General Electric, Rolls Royce, SNECMA, Tumansky...you know...the FEW people who have been developing and refining the jet engine for, what, oh, seventy-five years or so?
And I tend to think that the MW54 design that people are saying Jetjoe ''copied'' is also derivative from the Kamps and other stuff.
Riddle me this: if it is a direct copy, why can't Wren simply get an injuction to stop even the UK importer of Jetjoe? If you know your rights are being violated, you need to excercise due dilligence to protect those rights, or face losing them. You can't wait till Ford does it, so it then becomes ''worth it'', you need to defend your rights whenever you are aware of a violation. So, why no filing by Wren against the Jetjoe importer?
I like Wren. I think they have deported themselves as professionals, and generally not gotten involved in this fracas, but it seems to me that some of their fans are overstating their proprietary rights to what is, in essence, very much already a derivative work. It reminds me more than a little of some of the more Virulent Converts To the Church Of Bob Violett whinging on about how The Bob INVENTED ducted fan and brakes and Life As We Know It.
If Wren has been wronged, let them go to court. At the very least, they could stop Jetjoe from coming into their own country, and would certainly give pause to other potential importers in other countries. If they actually have no legal rights, then what's this all about? If their contributions are that original, then they can prove it, and they deserve to control the licensing of them. If they just took all the best ideas from the past seventy-five years of jet engine design and repackaged them, well...the law may feel WREN owes these OTHER people money.
File a suit. It's not hard. If you can design a jet engine, you can certainly file a minor lawsuit.
Say...I seem to remember Jetcat claiming just a few years ago to have invented autostart, and they wanted to collect royalties from all using it. Whatever happened to that?
Didn't know people were ''keeping score''. Is this, what, Kentucky versus the United Kingdom? Seems like an awful lot of posters from Kentucky, and an awful lot from the UK. Go figure.
I can see nobody answered the question about who actually pays a license to WREN. Seems kind of an important question, being that some aspersions are being a-casted.
For that matter, who is Wren paying licensing to? Nobody? I would tend to think that most of their ''discoveries'' were actually discovered (at great expense) already by people such as Ohain, Whittle, General Electric, Rolls Royce, SNECMA, Tumansky...you know...the FEW people who have been developing and refining the jet engine for, what, oh, seventy-five years or so?
And I tend to think that the MW54 design that people are saying Jetjoe ''copied'' is also derivative from the Kamps and other stuff.
Riddle me this: if it is a direct copy, why can't Wren simply get an injuction to stop even the UK importer of Jetjoe? If you know your rights are being violated, you need to excercise due dilligence to protect those rights, or face losing them. You can't wait till Ford does it, so it then becomes ''worth it'', you need to defend your rights whenever you are aware of a violation. So, why no filing by Wren against the Jetjoe importer?
I like Wren. I think they have deported themselves as professionals, and generally not gotten involved in this fracas, but it seems to me that some of their fans are overstating their proprietary rights to what is, in essence, very much already a derivative work. It reminds me more than a little of some of the more Virulent Converts To the Church Of Bob Violett whinging on about how The Bob INVENTED ducted fan and brakes and Life As We Know It.
If Wren has been wronged, let them go to court. At the very least, they could stop Jetjoe from coming into their own country, and would certainly give pause to other potential importers in other countries. If they actually have no legal rights, then what's this all about? If their contributions are that original, then they can prove it, and they deserve to control the licensing of them. If they just took all the best ideas from the past seventy-five years of jet engine design and repackaged them, well...the law may feel WREN owes these OTHER people money.
File a suit. It's not hard. If you can design a jet engine, you can certainly file a minor lawsuit.
Say...I seem to remember Jetcat claiming just a few years ago to have invented autostart, and they wanted to collect royalties from all using it. Whatever happened to that?
I hate to say it......But this is the first time you have presented a logical well thought out agruement. It wasn't just a rant. Well done.
And, from some of the people I have talked to....your right.....Wren and others all started as part of the GTBA, then went their own ways. And, I am told, WREN and others, were not 'perfect' at the beginning. Users, distributors, and others provided feedback to improve the product. So, is it truly theirs alone? I really can't say. I am an engineer not a lawyer. But, in my field, it is call normal practice of the art. Using the learning and advise of others to make things better and cheaper. That 'Art' knowledge is normally considered 'public domain'. Again, my understanding is that you have to file patents and commercial design registrations to calim ownership. THEN, DEFEND THEM IN COURT. A tough and long task.
Dave
09-28-2009, 04:29 PM
#430
RE: OK JETJOE AGAIN BUT A GREAT THING
ORIGINAL: dw_crash
Curtis,
I hate to say it......But this is the first time you have presented a logical well thought out agruement. It wasn't just a rant. Well done.
And, from some of the people I have talked to....your right.....Wren and others all started as part of the GTBA, then went their own ways. And, I am told, WREN and others, were not 'perfect' at the beginning. Users, distributors, and others provided feedback to improve the product. So, is it truly theirs alone? I really can't say. I am an engineer not a lawyer. But, in my field, it is call normal practice of the art. Using the learning and advise of others to make things better and cheaper. That 'Art' knowledge is normally considered 'public domain'. Again, my understanding is that you have to file patents and commercial design registrations to calim ownership. THEN, DEFEND THEM IN COURT. A tough and long task.
Dave
Curtis,
I hate to say it......But this is the first time you have presented a logical well thought out agruement. It wasn't just a rant. Well done.
And, from some of the people I have talked to....your right.....Wren and others all started as part of the GTBA, then went their own ways. And, I am told, WREN and others, were not 'perfect' at the beginning. Users, distributors, and others provided feedback to improve the product. So, is it truly theirs alone? I really can't say. I am an engineer not a lawyer. But, in my field, it is call normal practice of the art. Using the learning and advise of others to make things better and cheaper. That 'Art' knowledge is normally considered 'public domain'. Again, my understanding is that you have to file patents and commercial design registrations to calim ownership. THEN, DEFEND THEM IN COURT. A tough and long task.
Dave
