Chinese Purifi 1ET400A Clone amp ???

[voodooless]

If a company is dishonest enough to steal a trademark

A trademark? Multiple:

- UcD
- Hypex
- Purify
- Aiyima
- SMSL

 

[kongwee]

Qc-01 Co-py Class D Digital Power Amplifier Pure Hifi Amp Hypex Min400a With Volume 350w*2 4ohm 200w*2 8ohm Snr 122db - Buy Power Amplifier,D Digita,Hypex Product on Alibaba.com

Qc-01 Co-py Class D Digital Power Amplifier Pure Hifi Amp Hypex Min400a With Volume 350w*2 4ohm 200w*2 8ohm Snr 122db - Buy Power Amplifier,D Digita,Hypex Product on Alibaba.com

www.alibaba.com

This site doesn't claim Aiyima SMSL.

 

[voodooless]

Qc-01 Co-py Class D Digital Power Amplifier Pure Hifi Amp Hypex Min400a With Volume 350w*2 4ohm 200w*2 8ohm Snr 122db - Buy Power Amplifier,D Digita,Hypex Product on Alibaba.com

Qc-01 Co-py Class D Digital Power Amplifier Pure Hifi Amp Hypex Min400a With Volume 350w*2 4ohm 200w*2 8ohm Snr 122db - Buy Power Amplifier,D Digita,Hypex Product on Alibaba.com

www.alibaba.com

This site doesn't claim Aiyima SMSL.

The link in the Topic Start does...

Why bring up a different link? It's not even on the same site. it is cheaper there though..

 

[kongwee]

The link in the Topic Start does...

View attachment 255267
Why bring up a different link? It's not even on the same site. it is cheaper there though..

Face plate is the same with the OP link. The link I sent is Alibaba website not Aliexpress. Plus I never trust Aliexpress.

 

[voodooless]

Plus I never trust Aliexpress.

But you trust Alibaba? They are the same company you know

 

[kongwee]

But you trust Alibaba? They are the same company you know

Yes and no. I never bother about the different. I don't need Alibaba as I am not a retailer. Aliexpress is just a front end of Taobao for international consumer. I never buy from Aliexpress as their shipping is super high. I can directly order from Taobao. Another alternative is Alibaba operated Lazada in my country which is supervised by our government. At least they are careful about description about their product listing.

 

[calvin tea]

Found a clearer picture. Could you guys tell is this real or clone?
https://img.alicdn.com/imgextra/i3/0/O1CN01XZOmBp1hx8tZXNkFN_!!0-tbbala.jpg

 

[bkatbamna]

Not surprising if they reverse engineered it. The Chinese copy and churn out rolexes and other watches so something like this would be easier.

 

[3eaudio]

it is clone one, you can check with Purifi, but how they can do?

 

[sergedc]

The Purifi board is "Designed in Denmark". Where is it made?

Maroon audio has an even cheaper one (828 USD), but domestic distribution only I think. At least its made by a reputable brand.

P400双声道Purifi D类HiFI后级-广州魔能音响设备有限公司

LM Audio: I have never heard of and cannot even find a website (probably a new company created by the cousin of the guy who works in the purify factory)

 

[kmsolo]

850.0US＄？No,I don't think this is the original e-commerce link.On the e-commerce platform in China, the price is ￥3999,about 580.0US＄.
This is a DIY product，It is composed of Purefi 1et400a core, more cheaper buffer board and power supply developed by himself,

 

[kmsolo]

850.0US＄?No,I think this is from a middleman.On the original e-commerce platform link in China,the price is ￥3999,about ＄580.
From the product information in Chinese,This is a DIY product, which is composed of purefi 1et400a core, more cheaper buffer board and power supply developed by himself,chassis etc,each end product has passed AP（ATS2） test.
'Clone' 'Aiyima' 'SMSL',I think it is the marketing means of some irresponsible middleman.
I think it is impossible to copy a class D power amplifier core. How do get the signal processing algorithm?I didn't expect to see some comments about China's stereotype here. I think this forum should be based on objective facts.

 

[dlaloum]

I wasn't sure, initially. At first glance, it looks like two 1ET400a with a custom input buffer board and some random caps on a slim PCB between the modules.

This "clone" as posted above by @JSmith :
View attachment 225347

Original Purifi build from @maty shown here:
View attachment 225348

But now, after looking closely, I tend to agree. The only difference I can spot is the lack of any QR code sticker on the clone. Those two white marked areas on the PCB around the big coil on each board don't exist on some Purifi boards, so that's not a good indicator of a clone. See here, for example. But there should be one or two QR code stickers on the module and there are none on this suspected clone. Also, the crossed out white "Pb" marking (for RoHS compliance, I think?) below the big coil is missing. But I do wonder why they missed that and got everything else perfect.

Sometimes the copies are based on early version of devices - which have imperfections, that are ironed out later in the real product, but remain in the clone.

This happened with a clone of one of the small Fords around circa 2001 or so - they copied the blueprints precisely - down to an error - which they faithfully produced in large numbers!

That error allowed ford to identify the specific version of the blueprints that had been stolen...

On the other hand - they may have designed their own PCB's based on the design - the chinese have gotten far more sophisticated over time.

 

[cybernaut667]

They do copy and steal.
But at some cases they are now better..
Xiaomi is the perfect example.
Number 3 manufacturer mobile phone worldwide nowadays after only Apple and Samsung.

 

[Matias]

They do copy and steal.
But at some cases they are now better..
Xiaomi is the perfect example.
Number 3 manufacturer mobile phone worldwide nowadays after only Apple and Samsung.

In this analogy they don't do the hard stuff, namely the SoC IP (ARM) and software (Google Android). Leaves the easier part of sourcing parts and assembling.

 

[cybernaut667]

True dat

 

[SuicideSquid]

Don´t think any lawyer will chime in about any chinese clone and copyright laws in Denmark.

I'm a lawyer and I'll chime in about six months too late - copyright and IP laws are near-universal because domestic copyright laws are mostly derived from international treaties. For example, the Rome Convention is a treaty that covers copyright in performances, recordings, and broadcasts, while the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights covers commerce-related IP rights (such as trade secrets, copyright over commercial designs, patents, and trademarks). Most countries are signatories to these treaties and then adopt the general framework of those treaties into domestic intellectual property law.

And if these things are being manufactured in China and sold to the US, it's likely Chinese law, or possibly US law, but almost certainly not Danish law that will apply, despite Purifi being a country based in Denmark.

There are a few issues with clones and copies made in China and applying intellectual property law to those clones.

First, there's a question of whether these are clones or "real" devices manufactured in the same facility without the IP owner's consent. You frequently see the latter with grey market toys - for example, employees at a factory that manufactures Pokémon stuffed animals for Nintendo and the Pokémon Company may come in after-hours and manufacture more Pokémon toys without Nintendo's approval and sell those toys on the side. They're "real" in the sense that they're made in the same factory with the same materials, but they're manufactured in violation of that factory's contract with Nintendo and are sold on the grey market. Then there's the factory that just manufactures cheap ripoffs of Pokémon out of inferior materials, sometimes with obvious errors and mistakes, that end up in dollar store bins.

So this device might be real, it might contain boards that are manufactured in the same factory that manufactures Purifi boards but produced without Purifi's knowledge or consent, or someone may have simply cloned Purifi's design and slapped the Purifi name on it, or it might not even be a clone, but is playing on the Purifi name for recognition. It's not clear.

In the case of someone who is manufacturing excess Purifi boards at the factory that manufactures the genuine article and is then selling them on the side, the primary issue there is one of breach of contract, rather than an IP claim, and any litigation would be governed primarily by the contract signed between Purifi and the manufacturer.

When it comes to IP issues, Purifi has a trademark over their name and copyright over the circuit board layout and other components in their amplifiers, and those intellectual property rights are almost certainly enforceable in China. If a Chinese company is selling products under the Purifi name without a license from Purifi, or if they're selling boards that are clones of Purifi's boards (rather than boards that are merely similar, or inspired by, Purifi's design, which is permissible under most copyright legislation), Purifi would absolutely have a claim against that manufacturer for trademark and copyright infringement.

But the problem for Purifi (and many other companies who fight against grey market or counterfeit goods production) is two-fold. On the one hand, while the law is technically on Purifi's side, actually enforcing it in China is a massive uphill battle - China has the most massive bureaucracy in the world and navigating it to get an order against some random guy in Shenzen selling counterfeit boards out of a back alley shop is way more trouble than it's worth. On the other, it's a game of whack-a-mole - shut one company down and another's going to spring up in its place. For these reasons most companies turn a blind eye to a lot of this counterfeit and grey market stuff when it's appearing on sites like Alibaba, with the knowledge that no one really goes to Alibaba and buys a "GENUINE GIBSON" guitar for $150 and expects to actually get a Gibson. But if an instrument retailer in the US starts importing those guitars en masse and starts selling them state-side as if they were genuine Gibsons, you better believe Gibson's going to take notice and go after them. Likewise with a lot of these counterfeit or grey market amplifiers and other audio devices on Alibaba - it's just not worth a company's time to play whack-a-mole, especially when these companies are selling direct to consumers who are aware they're getting counterfeit or grey market goods which do not reflect on the original manufacturer's reputation.


***All of this is my opinion only and none of it should be taken as legal advice. If you need legal advice about a potential intellectual property claim, you should consult a lawyer who practices in this area in your jurisdiction.

 

[mhardy6647]

This happened with a clone of one of the small Fords around circa 2001 or so - they copied the blueprints precisely - down to an error - which they faithfully produced in large numbers!

Sort of like the postwar-era Soviet reverse-engineered clone of the Boeing B-29 Superfortress, the Tu-4?

Tupolev Tu-4 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Sort of.

 

[kemmler3D]

I'm a lawyer and I'll chime in about six months too late - copyright and IP laws are near-universal because domestic copyright laws are mostly derived from international treaties. For example, the Rome Convention is a treaty that covers copyright in performances, recordings, and broadcasts, while the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights covers commerce-related IP rights (such as trade secrets, copyright over commercial designs, patents, and trademarks). Most countries are signatories to these treaties and then adopt the general framework of those treaties into domestic intellectual property law.

And if these things are being manufactured in China and sold to the US, it's likely Chinese law, or possibly US law, but almost certainly not Danish law that will apply, despite Purifi being a country based in Denmark.

There are a few issues with clones and copies made in China and applying intellectual property law to those clones.

First, there's a question of whether these are clones or "real" devices manufactured in the same facility without the IP owner's consent. You frequently see the latter with grey market toys - for example, employees at a factory that manufactures Pokémon stuffed animals for Nintendo and the Pokémon Company may come in after-hours and manufacture more Pokémon toys without Nintendo's approval and sell those toys on the side. They're "real" in the sense that they're made in the same factory with the same materials, but they're manufactured in violation of that factory's contract with Nintendo and are sold on the grey market. Then there's the factory that just manufactures cheap ripoffs of Pokémon out of inferior materials, sometimes with obvious errors and mistakes, that end up in dollar store bins.

So this device might be real, it might contain boards that are manufactured in the same factory that manufactures Purifi boards but produced without Purifi's knowledge or consent, or someone may have simply cloned Purifi's design and slapped the Purifi name on it, or it might not even be a clone, but is playing on the Purifi name for recognition. It's not clear.

In the case of someone who is manufacturing excess Purifi boards at the factory that manufactures the genuine article and is then selling them on the side, the primary issue there is one of breach of contract, rather than an IP claim, and any litigation would be governed primarily by the contract signed between Purifi and the manufacturer.

When it comes to IP issues, Purifi has a trademark over their name and copyright over the circuit board layout and other components in their amplifiers, and those intellectual property rights are almost certainly enforceable in China. If a Chinese company is selling products under the Purifi name without a license from Purifi, or if they're selling boards that are clones of Purifi's boards (rather than boards that are merely similar, or inspired by, Purifi's design, which is permissible under most copyright legislation), Purifi would absolutely have a claim against that manufacturer for trademark and copyright infringement.

But the problem for Purifi (and many other companies who fight against grey market or counterfeit goods production) is two-fold. On the one hand, while the law is technically on Purifi's side, actually enforcing it in China is a massive uphill battle - China has the most massive bureaucracy in the world and navigating it to get an order against some random guy in Shenzen selling counterfeit boards out of a back alley shop is way more trouble than it's worth. On the other, it's a game of whack-a-mole - shut one company down and another's going to spring up in its place. For these reasons most companies turn a blind eye to a lot of this counterfeit and grey market stuff when it's appearing on sites like Alibaba, with the knowledge that no one really goes to Alibaba and buys a "GENUINE GIBSON" guitar for $150 and expects to actually get a Gibson. But if an instrument retailer in the US starts importing those guitars en masse and starts selling them state-side as if they were genuine Gibsons, you better believe Gibson's going to take notice and go after them. Likewise with a lot of these counterfeit or grey market amplifiers and other audio devices on Alibaba - it's just not worth a company's time to play whack-a-mole, especially when these companies are selling direct to consumers who are aware they're getting counterfeit or grey market goods which do not reflect on the original manufacturer's reputation.


***All of this is my opinion only and none of it should be taken as legal advice. If you need legal advice about a potential intellectual property claim, you should consult a lawyer who practices in this area in your jurisdiction.

Great post for clarification, I would also mention that if someone is cloning their boards, they may have a patent claim as well, regardless of where it's being manufactured, or what name it's sold under. However, the difficulty of enforcement you mentioned also applies there. I can confirm, but nobody is probably surprised that it's considered more or less futile to pursue IP claims against Chinese companies.

I can also confirm that once it hits Amazon or any other US retailer, you can usually get things taken down pretty fast, though. Usually there is no need to go through courts or lawyers on marketplaces, they tend to be quite responsive against IP complaints if you go through their systems.

 

[sarumbear]

Please refrain from spreading stereotypical impressions, Chinese manufacturers aren't just about cheaping out and copying others' designs, there are original designs reviewed here which turns in above-average performance at acceptable prices.

What part of that link is wrong? There’s always a reason why stereotypes exists.