Counterfeit -not "clone"

This is purely semantics, but calling imitation Luxeon emitters "Clones" gives the makers a pass for violating Lumiled's design and utility patents. This "cloning" isn't done to advance the science of LED emitters, it is done to profit from another company's advancement of the science.

When a company produces a product similar to a leading brand, labels it the same, and attemps to pass it off as the real thing, it's called a counterfeit, not a clone. I'ts a crime. I believe some of the counterfeiters can compete honestly if they choose to.

There appear to be some counterfeits that are well made, and produce a beautiful light, namely the "7W" from the Golston 7W Super Bright Waterproof. The emitter itself appears to be identical to a Luxeon at 20X on my counterfeit Minolta Field Microscope (I didn't know it was a counterfeit when I bought it). The star shaped heat sink even says LUMILEDS on it, but there is no bin code on the back.

It should be the case that the producer of that emitter attempt to compete with Lumileds the legitimate way. The shape of the assembly isn't what makes an emitter great. The "7W die is capable of producing a ton of pure white light. Repackaged with a proprietary housing, this emitter die can stand on its own. Most of us who bought the Golston did so knowing full well they were not real Luxeons. The attraction was a powerful light with a beautiful white beam for $26. You can't get a well made Luxeon light that puts out this much light for twice that price. That should be the niche for these foreign manufacturers. They should do it "Wal Mart" style, and try to compete by offering lower prices. If I knew of another well-made light that has the same emitter as the Golston, I would seriously consider it because it can deliver for a good price.

I would like more to choose from than the few "popular" name brand LEDs especially if they have the potential to compete so well. Face it, the next great leap in LEDs may not be a Lumileds product. We might end up talking about Luxeon emitters the way we talk about 5mm LEDs now.

Obviously the "7W" is unproven over time and it may turn out to be a short-lived "smoke emitter", but I see the potential for some obscure asian manufacturers to build a reputation and earn our business the honest way.

Bernie

Two independent comments:

-It's not proven that the LED inside the 7W Golston is not from Lumileds. The lack of bin code is not a proof. But I agree, there are good chances it is not.

-The World's science looks so "advanced" today because humans "counterfeit" each other inventions or ideas since centuries. This has became a "crime" since very few years only.


About this specific LED in the 7W Golston:
Can someone take it apart and run it in series with an actual Lux III under 1400mA constant current? (and well cooled)
Let them shine for days and see how they live by comparing brightness and Vf hour per hour.

Lumileds is well funded and capable of pursuing a patent infringement action if there's one to pursue. So if that's not happening, it sounds to me like the clones are legitimate. What kind of computer are you using? Probably an IBM PC clone, if you're like most of us. Being the first to develop something does not exempt anyone from competition. It just gets some narrow, temporary protection from competition under certain circumstances. BK hamburgers are round just like McDonalds and there is no patent infringement. So if those Luxeon competitors are doing something bad I'd want to hear specifics and not vague allegations.

CLONING is GOOD - it tends to spread around a good idea with added variation in price point, performance, and features that might be stifled by maintaining a monopoly.

COUNTERFEITING is BAD - it misrepresents a product to be more than it really is. Products cost more than what they are worth in a fair market without providing any added value.

An LED that looks and performs like a luxeon and sells at a cheaper price because it is not made by LumiLeds can be a net benefit for the seller and the buyer and does no harm to LumiLeds. The customer just didn't choose their product.

If an LED is marked LumiLeds and it is not (and I don't have a clue if that's the case here):
- the seller definitely benefits by getting a higher price just for the name brand,
- the buyer may benefit if he gets the same performance for a cheaper price or he may lose by not getting all the performance he is paying name-brand prices for, and
- LumiLeds definitely loses the sale that the buyer thought he was buying.

Of course, there is another possibility that I recall seeing somewhere when reading about these particular lights. IIRC, it specifically called them "non-Luxeon" LED's so there was no intent to misrepresent and the possibility was raised that they might be LumiLeds rejects or surplus. If that's the case, they're not counterfeit or clones. And as long as no one claims them to be LumiLeds, either by name or by making the name printed on the LED part of the advertising, there is no harm done and no-one has been decieved. To me this would seem to be the simplest explanation and, until shown proof of wrongdoing, that's what I'll assume the answer to be.

Yeah, if it actually says "Lumileds" and it's not a Lumileds product, that's a different kettle.

Here are three links for three different lights which shows explicitly "Lumileds" on the LED star PCB:
http://photobucket.com/albums/v619/ledaholic/HY-SWAT/
http://www.flashlightreviews.com/reviews/amart_nonlux_123a.htm
http://candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?t=105401

So, they are either actual Lumileds LED or counterfeit LED.

On flashlightreview it is said it's a "non-luxeon". What does this mean when we can clearly see "Lumileds" on the star PCB?
It's like if I was making and selling a car that looks like a Mercedes, smells like a Mercedes, runs like a Mercedes, it's labeled Mercedes on it, but I say it's NOT a Mercedes because I don't want to be sued for "cloning" a Mercedes. Non sense to me.

Are you guys sure that Lumileds doesn't make unmarked stars?

UVvis said:

Are you guys sure that Lumileds doesn't make unmarked stars?

Click to expand...

Or they (the Golston people in this case) might be buying just the emitters and making the PCBs cheaper somewhere else. It's a longshot but hey, it's possible.

glire said:

.....It's like if I was making and selling a car that looks like a Mercedes, smells like a Mercedes, runs like a Mercedes, it's labeled Mercedes on it, but I say it's NOT a Mercedes because I don't want to be sued for "cloning" a Mercedes.....

Click to expand...

But if LumiLeds made it and LumiLeds put the name on it. Then, after it had already been built, decided (for whatever reason) that they didn't want it being sold as an "official" LumiLeds Luxeon. In that case, they might sell it to a 3rd party with the understanding that they not use the LumiLed or Luxeon name, even though Lumiled had already put the name on the part themselves.

In that scenario, the part wouldn't be a counterfeit or a clone since LumiLed made it themselves and put their own name on it. I'm not sure what you would call it in that scenario, maybe "unofficial" or "unapproved"?

OK, we are mixing two names here: Lumileds and Luxeon.
Really, I don't see any reason why Lumileds would make a LED that looks like their Luxeon line but ask their customers not to call them Luxeon.

In any case, it seems there is a consensus that these LEDs are actually from Lumileds. Isn't that the main point?

LumiLeds is the manufacturer name. Luxeon is their brand name for the high power LEDs. My understanding is that you can't call it a Luxeon unless it's manufactured by LumiLed. The two terms sometimes get used interchangably.

Nobody knows why they say LumiLeds on the LED star. It could have ben put there by some unknown company in an effort to counterfeit. Or it could have been put there by LumiLed. At this point, there's no way to know which.

As far as why a company might have their name on a product but not want to sell it as their own, it's usually due to the product not meeting their quality control in some way. However, if it is still functional, they might sell it to a third party at a discount. For example, if the printing was poor or how the star part was stamped out had an error, it might make the end product look like crap but still function normally. If you are charging a premium for selling a top of the line product, you don't risk sending out "ugly" products even though the function is still fine. You need to protect your reputation. But to minimize your losses, you sell the working units to another manufacturer. However, once again you need to protect your product's reputation, so you make them agree that they can't use your premium products name.

Since I haven't seen anything to suggest that they are being sold as "Luxeons" even though the "LumiLeds" name is on them, I suspect this may be what happened. After all, if the "LumiLed" name was put on them for counterfeiting purposes, you can only get the premium price if you say they are premium products, and the light manufacturer hasn't done that.

Robban said:

Or they (the Golston people in this case) might be buying just the emitters and making the PCBs cheaper somewhere else. It's a longshot but hey, it's possible.

Click to expand...

The reason I ask is that I have removed what I know to be for a fact Lumiled Luxeon III stars from lights that and the stars were unmarked. These were ordered in the tens of thousands for a brightness bin within a particular Vf range. I'm guessing that for such orders Lumileds may not print the info on the back, but maybe on the spool or reel of them?.? I can also see a vendor asking that the markings not be printed for thermal issues, though small, it could be.

I wonder how Mag would handle a similar situation

I have to say that the star shown in my pictures on photobucket, is a real Luxeon. I replaced the star that came in it (which was unmarked) because I drove the current up to about 1000ma and the emitter smoked very quickly. As I was looking at the star assembly closely, I noticed 2 things different about it. The star "slug" was only about 2/3 as thick as a Luxeon and the emitter was almost attached to the "slug" with silicone. When I clipped the leads of the emitter, it just fell off the "slug". I feel it is safe to say that particular star was a counterfeit Luxeon as it was marked "Lumileds"

Quoted from PaulR

What kind of computer are you using? Probably an IBM PC clone, if you're like most of us. Being the first to develop something does not exempt anyone from competition

Click to expand...

My IBM compatible PC does not say "IBM" all over it and was not marketed as such. I bough my brand of PC because it offers equal or greater performance than IBM for a better price. They have earned a good reputation. This is specifically my point.

I really appreiciate the thoughts that are being exchanged in this thread. I am referring to counterfeit stars and emitters which specifically say "LUMILEDS" on them, and look identical to Luxeon Stars. It may of course be proven that the Golston uses real Luxeons, but that does not exempt my point.

My main point is two fold:
1: To suggest that we call a counterfeit a counterfeit if it is marked and represented to be something it is not.
2: Suggest that some of these counterfeits can compete as a new brand. If they can compete in performance, give them a proprietary name and be proud of it. As I said, I would buy lights using the Golston "7W" namesake because I would recognize the value of it.

I am NOT bashing these makers, or suggesting that they are illigitimate, or that we should not buy them. I think that some of them have something important to offer. I just wish they would be honest and promote them as unique. We actually have more alternatives to Luxeon and Jupiter. We just don't know them when we see them, and we can't tell the excellent from the junk if they all say "LUMILEDS"

Bernie

I thought Mag had the patent on handheld objects that emit light?

Scott

The clone emitter in my golston does not have the anode - cathode identifiers that genuine luxeons have.

Anyway, if it is brighter than a genuine lux 3 I don't care who makes it...

mypalthetortoise said:

The clone emitter in my golston does not have the anode - cathode identifiers that genuine luxeons have.

Anyway, if it is brighter than a genuine lux 3 I don't care who makes it...

Click to expand...

But if it may only last 30 - 40 hours, then IMHO, it's a cheap counterfeit.

Right, they are counterfeit if they look and say lumileds but are not. Clone is easier to type though

"counterfeiting" and "cloning" seem to work well in the natural world why undermine succesfull strategies in the business world?

I agree with Glire, patents and copyrights undermine natural selection in the economy and should be done away with.