A "copy" ???

[mohanjude]

Don't know... If you use poor grammar the following statement means what?

Accuracy does not come into it as the grammar is poor. IMHO the message is clear - "they have nothing to do with us"

"Here we, Sysmax Ind(NITECORE & JETBeam) seriously declare that, we are NOT the same company with Niteye. As a famous flashlight manufacturer and a proud member of PLATO, we feel shame on Niteye for its imitation of Spy007 and copy our selector ring patent. We strongly condemn such behaviors! "

 

[Phil Ament]

Don't know... If you use poor grammar the following statement means what?

Accuracy does not come into it as the grammar is poor. IMHO the message is clear - "they have nothing to do with us"

"Here we, Sysmax Ind(NITECORE & JETBeam) seriously declare that, we are NOT the same company with Niteye. As a famous flashlight manufacturer and a proud member of PLATO, we feel shame on Niteye for its imitation of Spy007 and copy our selector ring patent. We strongly condemn such behaviors! "

So does that mean to say that the fact that English isn't their first language makes absolutely no difference to you. I also cannot see how the words that actually say "we are NOT the same company" can be taken to mean anything else but exactly that, no matter how poor the grammar may be.

 

[borealis]

The arguing here seems ridiculous to me.

I have never seen any evidence from Sysmax stating their affiliation with Niteye. All the evidence anyone has ever found came from Niteye only. It's on the Niteye website, it's in a Niteye press release about presenting something at some event, and the Jetbeam logo is in the Niteye video. None of this indicates that Sysmax was a party or allowed the copying of their designs or the use of their name or logo in any of those publications. The dealer in the MP just acknowledged he may have been wrong about Niteye's affiliation with Sysmax.

Someone asked earlier in the thread why would a "business" do this? To me the answer is obvious -- to ride on the good established name of another company until that company finds out and gets an injunction or sues, assuming such an option even exists in China. And even then it may take years before the non-existent Chinese IP enforcement takes any action. In the meantime they're stealing designs and making money.

 

[Phil Ament]

It is interesting to see Sysmax the owners of Jetbeam and Nitecore condemning Niteye and saying they are not related!

I also do not understand how just as can be seen above, that you appear to be inferring that there statement is not correct, yet in your very next post you then claim that "Accuracy does not come in to it". I had thought that the latter part of this discussion was about whether their statement was accurate or not, and not at all about the fact that they may not be able to be grammatically perfect when posting in a foreign language.

 

[mohanjude]

So does that mean to say that the fact that English isn't their first language makes absolutely no difference to you. I also cannot see how the words that actually say "we are NOT the same company" can be taken to mean anything else but exactly that, no matter how poor the grammar may be.

Not clear about your point? What is the message from the statement that Sysmax wrote?

The way i read is that the statement was written by Sysmax to disassociate themselves from Niteye.

They (Sysmax) feel shame and condemn such behaviours (Niteye). Is it really possible that a company that is related will denounce itself publicly? I agree there is a lack of clarity but unless I hear otherwise the message is clear to me.

 

[mohanjude]

I also do not understand how just as can be seen above, that you appear to be inferring that there statement is not correct, yet in your very next post you then claim that "Accuracy does not come in to it". I had thought that the latter part of this discussion was about whether their statement was accurate or not, and not at all about the fact that they may not be able to be grammatically perfect when posting in a foreign language.

Think we are going around circles. I have no intention of cluttering this thread up by ending up having a argument with you. No offence was intended and I am sure that wasn't your intention either.

My original statement was meant to inform this thread that Sysmax have felt necessary to make an announcement to condemn Niteye and mention the fact that Niteye copied the selector ring. I did not intend that to be escalated into an argument if they are related or not !!! It is correct to be pointed out that they did not explicitly say they are not related but if they are going as far as saying they are not the same company?...

I cannot understand the purpose of their posting was meant to convey If they have deliberately posted half truths so that people can infer semantics then they have clouded the issue even more and done themselves no favours

Maybe someone better ask Sysmax directly if they are related to Niteye in anyway ?

To me 'related' means part of a company, share common resources, owned by a parent company etc... Using a trademark or paying royalties do not make them related in that sense.

 

[Phil Ament]

From what I have been able to establish the facts of the matter appear to be as follows:


Through the documentation that I have seen I have ascertained that the principals of Niteye also happen to currently own the JETBeam trademark/patents. It then seems as though that there must be some form of agreement between them, which not only allows both parties to use the brand name, but it would most probably also include the fact that Sysmax would have to pay certain fees or royalties to Niteye. This would then also mean that both companies could benefit from any added JETBeam sales, which also explains why they would not be in competition with each other or why they may advertise in conjunction, because it would then mean that Niteye also reaps some monetary benefits from any Sysmax Industries JETBeam sales. This also shows that whilst they may be affiliated in some way, Sysmax would most likely have nothing to do with nor have been aware of Niteye's decision to copy/clone another manufacturer's product, and so consequentially nor should they be held in the least bit responsible for it. This would also mean that Sysmax Industries is completely correct when they had stated that "they are not the same company".

Having said all of that, if any further conflicting information comes to hand then I would be the first person to admit that this particular scenario may have been wrong, however to the best of my knowledge it is correct. Also if anyone has a valid reason as to why that this may not be the case I am also very open to hearing about it, because I am just purely working on the facts as I know it! I hope that this all makes perfect sense!

 

[dudemar]

At this point the cat's out of the bag. I'm very curious to see how it performs against the 007 and let the proverbial pieces fall into place.

 

[jalal20]

I am not really into the whole discussion but I am 100% behind Dave's rights of design ownership and am not willing to discuss this at all.
But on the other side I would like to try this just for the sake of trying but I have a feeling that it will have that cheapish feel that all Ti chinese lights have. (Oh speaking of cheap, what does "Titanium Alloy Military Type III Hard-Anodized" what kind of voodoo is this ) Source: http://goo.gl/z9jUr 5th line in the list of specs
On a side note, I noticed that they called it the ZIP 20 , I am very confident that they are probably going to introduce the ZIP 30 or 40 which will be a Tri-V clone. (Who knows maybe they are waiting for the V2 before launching) its a Samsung apple thing

 

[Dubois]

To muddy the water further, perhaps, Voila-Niteye (who they??) posted in the Niteye Zip 20 thread:

"hey,Jetbeam is belong NITEYE COMPANY, it's have two brand( Jetbeam and NITEYE),Sysmas just is distributor.

We have a business license and brand certificate"

It was their first post. If you thought the English of Sysmax was ambiguous .....

 

[compasillo]

Over 100 posts since I shook up this thread yesterday in post #66 and a fake light is withdrawn from market the day after put on sale, few "well known" companies shown up, lot of users pissed off... we should have waited they sell a couple of lights to check the fake. Just out of curiosity ;-)

 

[Silgt]

I believe there remains a closer relationship between these companies than what is made to look. While they might be registered as a separate entities, there is no telling if they indeed shared a common manufacturing facility, design team, marketing personnels, distribution channel, owned by the same investor(s), managed under one roof etc. So by declaring they are indeed a separate companies is only at best, a half truth. They may be ran separately but that doesn't mean they don't share common platform and interest (e.g., Audi & Lamborghini) to make them efficient in their respective target market. It could be that Jetbeam being the high-end exclusive brand and Niteye being the innovative, quick to the market arm of the holding company??? (the 2012 Asia Outdoor Trade Fair in Nanjing certainly indicate so)

For every single one of us who are rightly outraged by the ZIP 20, there are hundreds of flashaholics in China and around the world who would have applaud Niteye for their "ingenious design". I believe this will be the start of the range for them, a LE in titanium at first and to be followed by other versions in aluminum or even a 2xAA? Niteye obviously see this as an opportunity to be "innovative" and potentially a good money making opportunity. Profit > Pride? :thumbsdow

Definitely unjust and unfair to Data, but this being the new economy and smaller, innovative, exclusive & low volume manufacturers will always remained a cottage industry while the big boys will try to benefit out of these situations. Not the first and definitely won't be the last!

 

[Launch Mini]

Fry, just my $.02 on the set programming vs the infinite variable.
I have the SF Titan. Yes I love the smooth infinite settings, but what I find is I probably run the light at lower levels than I would if it had defined settings.
Reason, when I use my SPY, say at level 3 or 4, I KNOW what the draw on the battery is, and approx how much run time I will have. With the Titan I am not sure. My eyes cannot tell that accurately the level etc and I find I go through batteries quicker on the Titan.
Also, my wife uses a SPY at the cabin. Now she doesn't know much about the lights, heat... So before I give her a light, she gets the programming with MAX at 750. Bright enough for her and she can run it on high as long as she wants without worry of killing the batteries or heat.

Same for start up on low low low on my SPY. I know I can pick it up at 2am, one click and I am good. Yes I could slowly twist the Titan, but...
Your mileage may vary.
Both are great.

 

[Phil Ament]

Has anyone seen this yet. When you first navigate to the JETBeam home page they have now just recently added a popup window that states the following:


Earnest declarations: SYSMAX Ind.(the sole owner of NITECORE & JETBEAM) and Niteye are NOT the same enterprise. As a famous flashlights manufactory and a member of PLATO, we SYSMAX feel shame about the counterfeit of SPY007 and the copied design of selector ring. At the same time, we strongly condemned the plagiarism from Niteye.





This is starting to appear to be getting very serious indeed!

 

[jalal20]

Has anyone seen this yet. When you first navigate to the JETBeam home page they have now just recently added a popup window that states the following:


Earnest declarations: SYSMAX Ind.(the sole owner of NITECORE & JETBEAM) and Niteye are NOT the same enterprise. As a famous flashlights manufactory and a member of PLATO, we SYSMAX feel shame about the counterfeit of SPY007 and the copied design of selector ring. At the same time, we strongly condemned the plagiarism from Niteye.





This is starting to appear to be getting very serious indeed!

Wowww thats a clear statement!

 

[dudemar]

we should have waited they sell a couple of lights to check the fake. Just out of curiosity ;-)

Exactly. Why not do comparisons and a review just for fun?

 

[Phil Ament]

I hope that it is cool to do this, but if not either just tell me or a mod can delete, however here is a video review from what looks like to be a dealer that has just received one although I should warn you that it is in German.

 

[dudemar]

I hope that it is cool to do this, but if not either just tell me or a mod can delete, however here is a video review from what looks like to be a dealer that has just received one although I should warn you that it is in German.

I already posted a link to that video.

 

[Phil Ament]

I already posted a link to that video.

Sorry, I must have missed that as when I saw that it was less than a day old I had thought that it was a new one!

 

[dudemar]

No worries.