We have all benefited by Hobbykings aggressive pricing, but it also a true fact that they are mass Copyright violator (at least 'Honest' Anna's fan should agree here). After Copying Easy Star and naming Bixler (they have done same with countless other ARFs), now they have copied the infamous MPX Funjet (My current Sunday escapade, which even avid Nitro fans can't resist)

http://www.hobbyking.com/hobbyking/store/__18252__Flyjet_X-83_Pusher_or_64mm_EDF_830mm_KIT.html

At 3700 shipped including possible customs, it is indeed 1000 cheaper than Original MPX Funjet. But I would testify the quality of MPX product, their Elapor material and finishing, HK wont beat that by at least a mile.

I wished they added rudder control to lure me, but hey! yet another alternative Flyers!!!

Thats a great copy by the way 
But you cant comment on the quality of these, the skywalker even though it is a chinese made, has a better finish than easystar.
Not sure they have mastered the dye making too I think, releasing so many foam models is indeed a difficult task.

 .....true that it looks like Funjet but beleive me there are many changes they made in it so escape any design issues (disappointment for Anna fans ), so we cant call it as copyright or patent or desing voilation.

Have you ever seen Sonalika's car : Link to image

You cant say that they copied Toyota's best selling Qualis.

any ways the point here is that they have an option here to make it EDF or porpellar this is really amazing.  ......

Quote from: foamybuilder on August 23, 2011, 12:37:54 PM
Thats a great copy by the way

But this one seems distinctly different because of the presence of a proper "duct" in front of the motor mount.  The duct design seems completely different, and would have an impact on flight characteristics.

Hobby King ---> <---- Ujjwaana

Again !!!!    Poor HobbyKing !!!!   

Just pulling your leg Ujjwaana. A critic is also required. we appreciate your perspective too. 

+1 Anwar
scoop for cooling the motor looks huge, this will definitely add drag and reduce some agility which is the biggest trademark of funjet.

Quote from: sundaramvelar on August 23, 2011, 12:44:37 PM
Hobby King ---> <---- Ujjwaana

Tony would getup from sleep and come here to check what wrong did he do this time !!

Quote from: anwar on August 23, 2011, 12:43:57 PM
But this one seems distinctly different because of the presence of a proper "duct" in front of the motor mount.  The duct design seems completely different, and would have an impact on flight characteristics.

Oh Yeah!! Forums raise concern on posting 'Modified' designs of other flyer without their 'Due consent', at at least an honest mention, even when the original designer were giving the plans for free. HK Plane is 80% knockdown of Funjet, even a non RC flyer would say (I would try this with my flatmate once he comes back from his business trip). Moreover this is clear cut infringement of a commercial product. China is a known IP outlaw, holding on the ransom of providing cheap good to the country whose IPs they infringe. I won't be surprised of MPX could not take any stance. I personally know a much bigger S/W giant whose product you use every day avoid such posisble inability to take action against China by not letting Source Code of its product stored in server situated in China. MPX is such a dwarf in front of it.

Companies like MPX spend a lot on R&D and done numerous refinement in their popular planes over the year. To simply disregard their credit with superficial trait would be unjust. I would question the 'paid' reviewer in the items discussion page that he did a 180+ mph on this airframe which has to face the test of time.

Yes Foamybuilder. The might of HK is ever increasing. From once being polite to mercilessly attacking its just critique who also bought from them, HK has started feel as if in 'God Mode' (Quake Arena fans would understand)... I pity when people concede to their bully.

If we carry the same argument and apply it to things like automobiles, one would find too many similarities between models of various companies.  There are many cars that look 80% like models from other companies.  The same would apply to mobile phones etc.  It seems like "enough of a change" is enough these days !

  as mentioned SONALIKA CAR

+1 to Anwar

A rear duct will theoretically improve top flow over the fuselage, which means , (a) fuse lift will be very high (b) max speed will be retricted, won't be as fas t as funjet (c) low speed characteristics could be exceptional , much better than fun jet.

Waiting for field eval

Atleast funjet ultra is still safe, even if they get the design right they would never be able to make foam like the ultra has.
But then again, if they can do this (Fake Apple store) then they can do any thing

Quote from: anwar on August 23, 2011, 02:04:35 PM
If we carry the same argument and apply it to things like automobiles, one would find too many similarities between models of various companies.  There are many cars that look 80% like models from other companies.  The same would apply to mobile phones etc.  It seems like "enough of a change" is enough these days !

FYI There has been litigation on such IP Theft... there was tiff between Ferrari F1 team and some other team on tech theft. Jaguar sued Hyundai for copying front grill of Sonata. Recently Apple pulled a 'Ban' on Samsung Galaxy S2 in Europe.

http://forums.steampowered.com/forums/showthread.php?p=24487086

Beneficial to flyers or naught, design theft is design theft, even if the perpetrators scout unpunished.

Adding to SLR view, MPX has its own High Performance Funjet version : the Funjet Ultra. I would doubt HK would ever meet the high standards of even basic Funjet. I own a AXN Floater myself(crashed repaired twice) and built 3-4 Easy Star for others (one just last Sat). AXN has too many 'Air Pockets' than dull looking Easy Star. I hope serious flyer would understand the repercussions.

Quote from: anwar on August 23, 2011, 02:04:35 PM
If we carry the same argument and apply it to things like automobiles, one would find too many similarities between models of various companies.  There are many cars that look 80% like models from other companies.  The same would apply to mobile phones etc.  It seems like "enough of a change" is enough these days !

+1 Anwar Sahab.

Wow Ujjwal, what a copy, Ok this kind of ducted fan would be cheaper to produce and probably save many accessories to be supplied with it, and decals oh yes they changed them.  I fear one day they would not spare even Anwar Saheb's forum(May be): forum is not doing bad after all.

@ FoamyBuilder, I can't see Made in Germany written on MPX Funjet Box any where, Made in China written on a Box is not a Curse for a product.

The Sin is in copying a product and finding justifications for it, OK be a man HK and let it come on face, yes we have copied it.

Automobiles and RC planes I can't find any similarity in them.

Quote from: Akshayb on August 23, 2011, 05:59:47 PM
Automobiles and RC planes I can't find any similarity in them.

Again way off   The "similarity" is in that the issue is not the item, but the intellectual property rights behind those items. And IP rights are similar, regardless of the item (cars, mobiles, computers, RC planes).

There are lots of absurd patenting going on these days.  And many do get squashed on reconsideration, when people are able to submit what is commonly known as "prior art". It seems like just like in the automobile world where the shapes of cars are fairly similar, this amount of change in structure is enough for HK to stand clear of IP issues on this one. 

The morality of this is whole another issue.

PS: Here is an interesting article about how Apple is trying too hard to convince Samsung has copied them :

http://jan.wildeboer.net/2011/08/apple-seemingly-photoshopped-to-make-its-point-in-samsung-case/
http://www.dailytech.com/Apple+Caught+Using+Photoshop+to+Fake+More+Pics+in+Lawsuits/article22500c.htm

Copy is Copy is Copy.............

This Chinese seller is famous for bringing out copies of many many planes including Arfs.

Like Bixler is Copy of xxxx

And Yet another flyJet copy of XXXXX  

Take Both Planes to a Blind school and I am sure more than 90% of students will tell they are same, Can't say for sure about People having EYEs

I think we are here to discuss  RC planes  not IP laws

Quote from: Akshayb on August 23, 2011, 08:21:03 PM
I think we are here to discuss  RC planes  not IP laws

This whole thread is about IP (laws)... that is what "copying" in this thread refers to. 

But I see this is turning into another thread of "argument for the sake of arguments". So I am bowing out

OK Anwar Bhai Thanks for telling me Copying means IP laws.

I thought I was discussing about HK Copying Famous plane designs, not for sake of arguments.

If you cannot see the IP angle here, please see reply #12 by Ujjwal.

Quote from: Akshayb on August 23, 2011, 08:21:03 PM
Copy is Copy is Copy.............

Take Both Planes to a Blind school and I am sure more than 90% of students will tell they are same, Can't say for sure about People having EYEs

I think we are here to discuss  RC planes  not IP laws

+1 .
Okay, let me clear one thing, HK is only selling such **Copied**  models, not manufacturing them:
http://www.scaleflying.com/FlyJet-X-83-Prop-ARF_p_2042.html

But what would you call the shameless copying of music by Indian composers like Annu Malik and others "Inspiration" ?

Funjet design is so distinctive even when you compare with actual planes, leave alone R/C !! What have they done is only changed the Hatch and the Aft Fuse for a Ducted Fan. Rest of the Fuse, and almost 95% of the Wing is exactly the same. Now I can consider using popular wing-forms like Eppler/NACA etc as not copying, but a complete wing design, including the wingtips etc could never be considered just 'Similar' shape.

Would you say  Figo/Polo/Micra/i20 look as similar as Flyjet looks to Funjet ? And please, the Sonalika instance is one off case - they are not mass produced cars and there are so many chop shops who custom build a average Joe's carinto Porche/Ferrari.

Gusty Sir,

Your assertions about the induced drag by the duct design is so evident from the flight video:


The Flyjet is  slow than my 3S Funjet setup and considerably slower than Sanjeev's 4S setup. The vertical roll rate is also much slower.  

Interesting to see people getting worked up, without (what seems to be) reading/understanding what is posted !

No one said there is no copying   No one said what is done is fair

The point is that even small changes are being passed of these days as enough of a change to avoid legal issues over IP rights.  This is evident in many areas, including automobiles, computers, mobiles etc.  Now is this sentence really that hard to understand ?

Can anyone absolutely guarantee that none of the Multiplex (or other manufacturers) planes do not look very similar to prior designs ? Do they acknowledge any similarities ?  These things seem to be taken for granted these days.

Quote from: ujjwaana on August 23, 2011, 11:56:44 PM
+1 .
Okay, let me clear one thing, HK is only selling such **Copied**  models, not manufacturing them:

Your own post contradicts the subject of the post you created.
Why was it not posted that http://www.scaleflying.com is coping funjet, and why hobbyking a target always . I am no ambassador for hk, but wanted to understand why only hk is targeted while all most sellers do the same.

Many times, this fact is discussed on this forum about homages or copies or clones.

Like Clones/homages/copies of Easy star (now why the world is calling clones of "Easy star", simply because  when this plane was introduced this was pioneering design), heaps of rc sites on internet are full of these references where they call other planes as easy star clones. one is

http://www.diydrones.com/profiles/blog/show?id=705844%3ABlogPost%3A228511&commentId=705844%3AComment%3A228621&xg_source=activity

Than why not we call easy star a clone, copy or homage, if something luke this existed before. That is proof enough that this plane was indeed a pioneering design, same is in case of Funjet.

Now why to call planes sold by HK viz. Bixler and Fly jet Copies ( sorry these are just branded products, Hk don't manufture any thing) the planes are copied  as it is (bixler is copy of  Easy star  and Fly jet is copy of You know of whom)  and just changed the decals of these planes and internet is full of these references. No body have called AXN floater jet copy of Easy star, but it was called homage of easy sear as design concept was taken not copied as it was.Refer to site mentioned above.

Here I can see a point, why hobby king sells cheaper (as per common perception), simply because they need to get the products branded from Chinese manufacturers, who fearlessly copy fast selling products from world over, with out spending a single paisa on product development.

It is free economy enjoy the fruits of it, buy cloned products, or original but at least acknowledge the person who spend some money in developing it.

China leads the world in R&D and here when I say R&D if translated in Chinese it means
"READ AND DUPLICATE"