Deteknix sued by First Texas over T2 copyright infringement

Very interesting development

[hobby-detecting.com]

[hobby-detecting.com]

Rick Kempf
Gold Canyon AZ- where there is no gold



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/30/2016 05:04PM by lytle78.

I saw this coming. I remember that the owner posted a reply on a youtube video, a comment saying to the effect that, "what metal detector ISN'T a T2 copy?"

Beyonder-Pa Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I saw this coming. I remember that the owner
> posted a reply on a youtube video, a comment
> saying to the effect that, "what metal detector
> ISN'T a T2 copy?"


Yeah, I hounded them pretty bad in the comments and they responded with that! I very quickly chose not to offer their products on many fronts.

Thanks for the links Rick! Been trying to follow info on Deteknix.

Well the company that makes the T2 isn't making any money making new state of the art detectors...so they have to make money someway...

LowBoy

TAKE A LITTLE TIME KICKBACK AND WATCH SOME OF MY DETECTING VIDEO'S BELOW ON YouTube

[www.youtube.com]

If you don’t dig it, then how are you going to know what you’re missing!
How can you have your pudding if you don’t eat your meat!

I understand that FT is doing just fine selling metal detectors all over the world - hundreds of thousands of them I suspect. This suit will cost them big bucks and since Detecnix assets probably don't amount to much, even a favorable judgement would not likely result in much actual cash in FT's till.

More to the point, if FT is correct in their assertions, it represents the first time that a T2 copyright violator has set up shop in the US and marketing such items worldwide from here.

Since they clearly believe what they are claiming, they HAD to move on them.

Here are FT's specific claims as set forth in the suit: quote.

20. First Texas engineers have investigated the Deteknix Quest and the software contained thereon. Based on their investigation, and on information and belief, the Deteknix Quest contains software that is substantially similar to, and copies copyrightable aspects of, the T2 Software both in whole and in part.

21. On information and belief, Deteknix accessed First Texas’s T2 Software and copied it off a commercial T2 product. On information and belief, Deteknix used nitric acid and/or certain other techniques to defeat First Texas’s access protection and copy the T2 Software off a commercial T2 product.

Rick Kempf
Gold Canyon AZ- where there is no gold



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/30/2016 04:08PM by lytle78.

Sometimes you just have to make a statement, draw a line in the sand or this kind of thing will spin out of control.
Let that fire get big enough and it will be much harder to put out.

They can't do much about the crooks based in China, if the government of a country doesn't care or worse supports illegal behavior there is not much recourse.
This company being based technically in the U.S. puts it in a whole new arena.

I have a pinpointer of theirs with a bad switch that they told me to send in for replacement.
I better do that in case this guy decides to close shop and head back to safety.

Maybe Nokta will be the next manufacturer that FT will look at.

What's pathetic is Deteknix really doesn't have the ability to develop or copy any detector. They have implemented a copy of an already copied Chinese version (gold finder anyone?). Moving to the states has just made it easier for them to be prosecuted.

Yeah, the legal fees alone are many times more than the value of the company. They have a difficult time already bringing any product to market in any reliable quantity. This will bury them for good.

They really didn't pose much of a threat to FTP sales anyway. This is all about making a statement.

Nokta and Makro may be similar styles, but they've obviously made changes to code and design. Deteknix copied a copy which was exact replica of original T2 except dp tones having a typo call bp.

sanjuro Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Maybe Nokta will be the next manufacturer that FT
> will look at.

Why Nokta?

bado1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> sanjuro Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Maybe Nokta will be the next manufacturer that
> FT
> > will look at.
>
> Why Nokta?

Because the Fors Core seems to be a T2 clone

Am I the only one puzzled by nitric acid assisting in breaking access/copy protection??? Maybe to get in to see the structure of a proprietary chip?
The exact line between legal reverse engineering evolution and theft of copy and concept seems a bit fuzzy to me. I do see the need for one and how international issues make enforcement a bear.
I can see where First Texas has had enough of doing R & D for its competition and believes they have a case strong enough to to go to court.
Why let cell phone makers have all the fun?

Past(or)Tom
Using a Legend, a Deus 2, an Equinox 800, a Tarsacci MDT 8000, & a few others...
with my beloved, fading Corgi, Sadie

Section 3 of the below article explains exactly how it is done. Basically - as I understand it - when you write code to an EPROM you are actually making physical changes in the "blank" device. If you look at the device under magnification you can extract the code. Somebody told me it costs about $50k to jave this done.

Rick Kempf
Gold Canyon AZ- where there is no gold

There's plenty of info on the Web about reading data from protected devices. And one way involves removing a device from its plastic encapsulation (chemical means, usually) and electrically probing the surface of the silicon to monitor, or to force in electrical stimuli to the inner workings. To do this, the top insulating layer of the silicon is stripped off with a strong acid wash, exposing the conductive layers underneath.
Bear in mind this appears to have already been performed, as the 'T2 clones' are programmed up with 'genuine' code. So I assume if you have money and business contacts, the code can be purchased. The other possibility is the code that's programmed into the 'clones' may not be protected at all, and it may be trivial to read it out.

Lawrenzo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well the company that makes the T2 isn't making
> any money making new state of the art
> detectors...so they have to make money someway...

But they are making money. It's not easy coming up with new technology...

Lawrenzo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well the company that makes the T2 isn't making
> any money making new state of the art
> detectors...so they have to make money someway...


I guarantee that First Texas isn't hurting for any money cause they are selling a ton of detectors everyday, I'd say they sell more detectors than any other metal detector company.

lytle78 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Very interesting development
>
> [hobby-detecting.com]
> ix-quest-series-detectors-facts-and-proofs-why-not
> -to-buy-chinese-fakes/
>
> [hobby-detecting.com]
> ix-quest-series-detectors-facts-and-proofs-why-not
> -to-buy-chinese-fakes/

was it not YOU who stated that Makro had copied the T2 as well?

how did that go for you? - defamation or what?

[www.earthscan.co.nz]

FT allows their Ukraine Distributor to sell Vikings (T2 - GF2) in direct competition with their Tek T2's

Why then is one level of counterfeiting given the thumbs up and these ones are jumped on?

Would it not be better for the US to sell to their customers direct, no matter where in the world they are?

I don't want to buy from a local dealer that could not give a @#$%& about the hobby or refuses to promote the products - I prefer to buy from the US direct - Personally I wish FT the best however I think the best option is to bring out a new detector instead of constantly bitching on about the opposition

These guys still represent FT

[metallodetektor.com.ua]

I am sure we should expect this distributor to be shut down soon then

[www.earthscan.co.nz]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/01/2016 01:46AM by rustic charm.

Hello Rural Charm (a frequently used phrase in New Zealand real estate ads - that's how I figured out you were there) - I was wondering how long it would take for you to chime in.

A. I seriously doubt that I ever accused Makro of selling pirated First Texas intellectual property - If I did so, I apologize, since I have no evidence that that is the case. And since I have coresponded regularly with Dilip at Makro - I doubt I have a problem with them.

B. As far as who First Texas Products decides who to go after for infringement, - you must ask them. I'm sure they have their reasons.

Overall, you have consistently been an apologist for piracy - blaming those with property rights for the infringement of those rights by others.

I suspect that FT has "nailed" "Jason" and that might have something to do with the fact that Detecnix phone isn't answering today.

I will give you one thing - you are persistent!

Rick Kempf
Gold Canyon AZ- where there is no gold



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 10/01/2016 03:38AM by lytle78.

Edit, Hope it turns out ok for FT.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 10/03/2016 03:41PM by auminesweeper.

Nothing new under the sun about stealing tech. Some of the richest on the globe got to where they are from stealing.... Microsoft, Apple, Xerox.
Certainly not saying it's right to do.

ozzie Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Nothing new under the sun about stealing tech.
> Some of the richest on the globe got to where they
> are from stealing.... Microsoft, Apple, Xerox.
> Certainly not saying it's right to do.
Absolutely, they have either got to outlaw it all together or just try to out smart the competition and find away to have the software to self destruct if any one connects anything that the machine does not recognise other than that just live with it,

John.

Ideas can't be copyrighted – inventions can be banded – that's not what's in dispute here.

Copyright applies to original works – Including software. you can't copy and then use copyrighted software legally. This is what FT accuses Detecnix of. If they did the things alleged in the suit, they broke the law and will be found guilt. Here is what they are accused of doing - the following is from the lawsuit.

20. First Texas engineers have investigated the Deteknix Quest and the software contained thereon. Based on their investigation, and on information and belief, the Deteknix Quest contains software that is substantially similar to, and copies copyrightable aspects of, the T2 Software both in whole and in part.

21. On information and belief, Deteknix accessed First Texas’s T2 Software and copied it off a commercial T2 product. On information and belief, Deteknix used nitric acid and/or certain other techniques to defeat First Texas’s access protection and copy the T2 Software off a commercial T2 product.

Rick Kempf
Gold Canyon AZ- where there is no gold

Tom's thought's way back when he tested the Racer, if a design is good there's no point in trying to reinvent the wheel?
.
.
Extreme similarities to F75/T2 platform. . . . . . such as: audio language, nearly identical 11" x 7" elliptical DD coil, VDI 00 - 40 is iron...... identical to T2, nickel ID & dime ID nearly identical to T2, push/pull trigger switch functionality, similar menu tooling/thought process...... and a host of other features. For those that own/use a T2 or F75........ the learning curve is very short/easy/comfortable. K.I.S.S. theory employed. Exceptionally easy to set up & learn. No 'multiple menu's and/or sub-menu's' to contend with. 
This units ID accuracy is nearly identical to T2/F75 platform. Very accurate at shallow/medium depths....... then presents more jumpy/wider VDI span..... as targets become deep. 

ghound Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Tom's thought's way back when he tested the Racer,
> if a design is good there's no point in trying to
> reinvent the wheel?
> .
> .
> Extreme similarities to F75/T2 platform. . . . . .
> such as: audio language, nearly identical 11" x 7"
> elliptical DD coil, VDI 00 - 40 is iron......
> identical to T2, nickel ID & dime ID nearly
> identical to T2, push/pull trigger switch
> functionality, similar menu tooling/thought
> process...... and a host of other features. For
> those that own/use a T2 or F75........ the
> learning curve is very short/easy/comfortable.
> K.I.S.S. theory employed. Exceptionally easy to
> set up & learn. No 'multiple menu's and/or
> sub-menu's' to contend with. 
> This units ID accuracy is nearly identical to
> T2/F75 platform. Very accurate at shallow/medium
> depths....... then presents more jumpy/wider VDI
> span..... as targets become deep. 

Another difference between the two is the T2 can only use DD Coils where as the F75 can use both.

John.

Making something which performs exactly like something else is not illegal - unless.....

1. It uses copyrighted designs - which includes, but is not limited to software

2. It violates patent rights to some "invention"

Dave Johnson for example worked at Fisher, Tesoro and Whites before he joined First Texas.

He can't (and certianly wouldn't) use the exact design of the detectors he worked on for Tesoro and Whites in any First Texas product. He is free however to design detectors which achieve the same results as long as the means by which they do this - hardware and software - are original.

Fisher is another matter, since FT now owns all of the Fisher intellectual property rights.

As far as the possibility of something sounding like a T2 or working like a T2 without using any of FT”s T2 software – here's a quote from Dave Johnson himself about how FT themselves plan to do exactly that.

"We’re not a company who stands still. Over the last several years we have introduced a whole series of new products on several new hardware platforms, and have constantly advanced the science of target signal processing. In the future we plan to introduce new processes which, although they may “feel” like a member of the T2 process family, will operate on different principles and will produce results of a kind which are not attained by any metal detector presently available". -Dave Johnson

Rick Kempf
Gold Canyon AZ- where there is no gold

The below is also posted on Finds...

[www.treasurenet.com]

Should be an interesting court case to follow.

I posted 2 things about this over there - they were both "disappeared" without any explanation

Rick Kempf
Gold Canyon AZ- where there is no gold

lytle78 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I posted 2 things about this over there - they
> were both "disappeared" without any explanation

Well Rick I just posted this one that page so I hope people get to see it before it Vanishes.

John.

QUOTE:- By Me.

Well where there is smoke there is fire, and FT's claims are Not much different than those of a Certain company who's Name you use without regard or respect and the only difference is the spelling Of which you are well aware of, Seems like FT are not your only Victim.

Good luck with that. END QUOTE

SeabeeRon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The below is also posted on Finds...
>
> [www.treasurenet.com]-
> response-recent-topics-about-ftp-v-s-deteknix.html
>
>
> Should be an interesting court case to follow.

Actually Ron, Nothing would surprize me with this company,



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 10/03/2016 03:43PM by auminesweeper.