Another Jebao Pump Failure

reeferfoxx · Sep 25, 2018

AlexStinson said:
It is for magnetic support for aquarium fittings

Can you link me the proper patent number?

AlexStinson · Sep 25, 2018

reeferfoxx said:
Can you link me the proper patent number?

https://patents.google.com/patent/US8191846B2/en

I'm not sure if google is a citeable source, but thats the first listing.

chipmunkofdoom2 · Sep 25, 2018

joec said:
Its not my opinion, it's a settled outcome forced on Jebao by the ITC. Jeboa was longer able to sell models in the US but continued to sell the stolen property outside the US, outside US jurisdiction.

The net takeaway is that they knowingly and deliberately stole the property in the first place.

People settle legal disputes out of court all the time. A good example of this is patent trolling. Patent trolls buy up old patents and go around threatening to sue people for using their IP without license. As an alternative to litigation, which can take months and cost thousands of dollars, the patent troll "offers" to settle the matter out of court for a few hundred dollars. Often times, these patents don't apply to the use in question and the defendant would never be found guilty in court, but many people choose to settle out court out of fear and lack of legal resources.

The above example is flat out extortion, and I don't mean to imply that this is what was happening in the Jebao and Hydor case. But, by definition, a settlement out of court means that no conviction has been made. Unless you have full details of the settlement (which you have not provided), you can't say this is proof that Jebao infringed on any patents. More importantly, if Hydor actually believed the case above had weight, they should not have settled. They really should have pursued Jebao until they were found guilty. By settling, Hydor is admitting it would be difficult, or at the very least, not worth their time, to find Jebao guilty of what they claim.

joec · Sep 25, 2018

chipmunkofdoom2 said:
People settle legal disputes out of court all the time. A good example of this is patent trolling. Patent trolls buy up old patents and go around threatening to sue people for using their IP without license. As an alternative to litigation, which can take months and cost thousands of dollars, the patent troll "offers" to settle the matter out of court for a few hundred dollars. Often times, these patents don't apply to the use in question and the defendant would never be found guilty in court, but many people choose to settle out court out of fear and lack of legal resources.

The above example is flat out extortion, and I don't mean to imply that this is what was happening in the Jebao and Hydor case. But, by definition, a settlement out of court means that no conviction has been made. Unless you have full details of the settlement (which you have not provided), you can't say this is proof that Jebao infringed on any patents. More importantly, if Hydor actually believed the case above had weight, they should not have settled. They really should have pursued Jebao until they were found guilty. By settling, Hydor is admitting it would be difficult, or at the very least, not worth their time, to find Jebao guilty of what they claim.

Yes, but none of that changes the fact that Jebao deliberately decided to steal the property in the first place and are disreputable.

Potatohead · Sep 25, 2018

This will probably go many pages.

Personally I would rather buy something once, than several times.

chipmunkofdoom2 · Sep 25, 2018

joec said:
Yes, but that doesn't change the fact that Jebao deliberately decided to steal the property in the first place

You keep staying they stole property. What property did they steal? Show me the legal document that states which patent numbers they infringed. Show the court ruling that finds Jebao guilt. So far you have only shared a press release that states one company's opinion.

reeferfoxx · Sep 25, 2018

AlexStinson said:
https://patents.google.com/patent/US8191846B2/en

I'm not sure if google is a citeable source, but thats the first listing.

I'll take this as credible but realistically, what they stole was how the magnet fits inside the magnet holder. Honestly, if anyone has ever owned a hydor pump, you'll know the magenetic mount was the worst design ever.
Jebao did well in the redesign with the PP series and all in all, the claim that jebao stole anything is a meme in of itself lol!!

tastyfish · Sep 25, 2018

I have been using a DC-6000 return pump for 4 years now. It's been faultless except for a year ago, when I hadn't cleaned/serviced it (ever) and it stalled. I cleaned it, changed the PSU (which did its job and blew the fuse) and it's been running ever since.

I've had a pair of RW-8's, they've been running for the same time without any issue. I also have a pair of cross flows, which have had issues initially (version 1) with an over-sensitive anti-stall feature. The vendor replaced, under warranty with version 3 pumps which have run without issue and provided awesome flow.

During that time, my local reef club friends have had multiple Ecotech Vectra failures and no one's Neptune WAV has lasted more than two years.

Now I'm not sitting here confident the return isn't going to fail, but actually the pumps are doing really well and I'm incredibly glad that I didn't pay much more money for higher end kit that fails.

I notice that a lot of pumps on the market seem to be using the Jebao/Jecod blocks and their pumps are also used in Deltec skimmers and calcium reactors also.

GQuinn · Sep 25, 2018

Removed.

Retro Reefer · Sep 25, 2018

I have been using Jabeo pumps for a few years without any failures, Getting ready to buy 2 more.. don’t really expect them to be perfect or last forever at the price point they sell for.

chipmunkofdoom2 · Sep 25, 2018

joec said:
Its not my opinion, it's a settled outcome forced on Jebao by the ITC. Jeboa was longer able to sell models in the US but continued to sell the stolen property outside the US, outside US jurisdiction.

The net takeaway is that they knowingly and deliberately stole the property in the first place.

Also, after re-reading the press release that you shared, there's absolutely nothing in there that confirms the bolded text above. It says the following:

HYDOR USA Inc. [snip] and Jebao Co., Ltd. (Jebao) of Zhongshan City, Guangdong province, China have entered into a settlement agreement and agreet to the entry of a consent order resolving issues raised in the International Trade Comission ("ITC") investigation.

...snip...

In the ITC Complaint, HYDOR accused the Jebao Wavemaker (WP line) and Jebao Propeller Pump (RW line) products of infringing HYDOR's United States Patent No. 8,191,846 (the '846 patent). Under the agreement and consent order, Jebao's accused WP and RW products will no longer be available for sale in the United States. The ITC issued the consent order and terminated the investigation on June 2, 2016.

There's no ambiguity here. Hydor complained to the ITC that Jebao stole its designs. Hydor and Jebao both VOLUNTARILY entered into an agreement that would drop the complaint. Once both parties came to the table and said they settled their disagreement, the ITC dropped the complaint. The ITC didn't force anyone to do anything. Both Hydro and Jebao acted of their own accord, and no guilty verdict was ever rendered (not that this document says).

There is no proof here that anyone stole anything. We know that Hydor complained to the ITC. We know that Hydor and Jebao then entered into a voluntary agreement. We know that they both asked the ITC to drop the complaint, and we know the ITC did. That's all we know.

As I said, I would love to read any actual court rulings you have where Jebao was found guilty of patent infringement. So far, all you have provided is Hydor's side of the story, and it's far from incriminating.

joec · Sep 25, 2018

chipmunkofdoom2 said:
You keep staying they stole property. What property did they steal? Show me the legal document that states which patent numbers they infringed. Show the court ruling that finds Jebao guilt. So far you have only shared a press release that states one company's opinion.

Jebao did the same thing with Maxspect.

It's impossible not to recognize Jeboa's corrupt operating principles

https://reefbuilders.com/2017/08/01...spect-awarded-us-patent-gyre-flow-technology/

Geebs19 · Sep 25, 2018

chipmunkofdoom2 said:
Also, after re-reading the press release that you shared, there's absolutely nothing in there that confirms the bolded text above. It says the following:

There's no ambiguity here. Hydor complained to the ITC that Jebao stole its designs. Hydor and Jebao both VOLUNTARILY entered into an agreement that would drop the complaint. Once both parties came to the table and said they settled their disagreement, the ITC dropped the complaint. The ITC didn't force anyone to do anything. Both Hydro and Jebao acted of their own accord, and no guilty verdict was ever rendered (not that this document says).

There is no proof here that anyone stole anything. We know that Hydor complained to the ITC. We know that Hydor and Jebao then entered into a voluntary agreement. We know that they both asked the ITC to drop the complaint, and we know the ITC did. That's all we know.

As I said, I would love to read any actual court rulings you have where Jebao was found guilty of patent infringement. So far, all you have provided is Hydor's side of the story, and it's far from incriminating.

reeferfoxx · Sep 25, 2018

joec said:
Jebao did the same thing with Maxspect.

It's impossible not to recognize Jeboa's corrupt operating principles

https://reefbuilders.com/2017/08/01...spect-awarded-us-patent-gyre-flow-technology/

What's interesting about that is jebao still sells their crossflow pump. What exactly was infringed here? The plastic?

chipmunkofdoom2 · Sep 25, 2018

joec said:
Jebao did the same thing with Maxspect.

It's impossible not to recognize Jeboa's corrupt operating principles

https://reefbuilders.com/2017/08/01...spect-awarded-us-patent-gyre-flow-technology/

Again, this is proof of nothing. This shows a patent was awarded to Maxpect, not that Jebao was found guilty on infringing it. The author implies that Jebao was copying Maxpect, but again, there are no legal rulings or court documents that support this claim.

It's not very hard to infer that you don't like Jebao as as a company or their products. And this is fine. You're free to like or dislike any company for any (or no) good reason. So far, however, you have not shared a single public record that corroborates your allegations that Jebao infringed on patents. Disliking a company is not evidence enough that they did something illegal. Please share the court rulings, US or international, that you are using as the basis for your opinions.

wesman42 · Sep 25, 2018

Besides, car companies copy features all the time. Chrysler 200 copied the Hyundai Sonata roofline (later stating in a press release they wish they hadn't because it was too low for rear passengers).

It really does boil down to proof, and there isn't any.

Companies borrow ideas from others all the time. How is there generic medications? No? Okay how about different brands of the same thing like a 5 gallon bucket.

saltyfilmfolks · Sep 25, 2018

wesman42 said:
Besides, car companies copy features all the time. Chrysler 200 copied the Hyundai Sonata roofline (later stating in a press release they wish they hadn't because it was too low for rear passengers).

It really does boil down to proof, and there isn't any.

Companies borrow ideas from others all the time. How is there generic medications? No? Okay how about different brands of the same thing like a 5 gallon bucket.

That’s patent licenses.

reeferfoxx · Sep 25, 2018

I hope nobody living by the 'stolen property' propaganda has ever bought a Nintendo.

ReeferBob · Sep 25, 2018

I don't think anyone really doubts Jebao stole its technology. Why some argue this is beyond me it is like arguing that the day doesn't have 24 hours. The day DOES have 24 hours just like Chinese companies STEAL R&D. It is the MO for most Chinese companies. Reverse engineer and or outright steal designs and replicate them. But with these companies that are protected by the Chinese government they make money by having very little or no R&D (they stole it) and very little or no QA. It is what it is. I do think we finally have someone that might do something about that but that is for another forum. Meanwhile, I never said ALL Jebao's will fail prematurely. But I did say 1/2 and I think that is an accurate number.

Hey I am greedy like most of you I bought them to save a buck knowing they were "cheap Chinese" products. I have purchased close to $500 worth and 80% have failed. I gave it a shot but fool me twice, shame on me! And as I also said, you can sort the Amazon ratings by date and you will see more and more failures the farther back you go. I like that Amazon allows you to change your rating as an item ages as this is the only way for people to know what to expect long term.

I REALLY wish people would stop comparing ANYTHING to Ecotech junk! They are the epitome of "the emperor has no clothes". Whoopty do they found a way to make magnets work through glass. That is pretty much all they got.