The Wholesale Forums

[theimporter]

What is the difference between this product and say a fake pair of Armani jeans?

It is clearly a copy/counterfeit/knock off of a real apple product but it is allowed on the forum...does that mean other fake products are allowed too as long as they are described as XYZ 'Style' products?

Maybe one for the forum mod's but would be intrested to see what other peoples take on this is?

Best Regards

[hoolsalers]

Originally Posted by theimporter

What is the difference between this product and say a fake pair of Armani jeans?

It is clearly a copy/counterfeit/knock off of a real apple product but it is allowed on the forum...does that mean other fake products are allowed too as long as they are described as XYZ 'Style' products?

Maybe one for the forum mod's but would be intrested to see what other peoples take on this is?

Best Regards

I also deal in this kind of product and my thoughts are. If something is "Unbranded" and doesn't advertise it self as the real thing & the user buying it knows its not the real thing then it's not a fake. This is true of the consumer market throughout the world. Take for instance Champagne, anything that tastes like Champagne but is not from the region of Champagne can not be called Champagne so it is sold as a similar product which is okay.

If something is branding itself as a product that it isn't then it is a fake and shouldn't be here.

If Apple Patent there designs then they wouldn't have this issue but they don't have the time to do this because they are always looking to change there design, so therefore providing its not a direct copy it doesn't break any laws.

[theimporter]

Lol...

That argument would never hold in a court of law.

More of a justification than an acceptable answer!

Designs are more often than not simply registered as a Trademark, there is a distinction, and even infringing a Trademark is illegal, let alone copying the whole thing and then saying oh its unbranded.

So you are telling me that if I were to produce LV handbags in exactly the same design (prob change the zip), using the same colours, but instead of LV I put on KH that would be ok?....No it would not!, the design is a registered trademark.

Again if I was to copy the coca cola bottle a product that is NOT PATENTED but a REGISTERED trademark and put on it Khalid Kola do you honestly think I could get away with it...NO

I think this needs to be very carefully and tactfully considered by the Forum as a copy is a copy whatever it may be called.

PS...if it was a generic product that is unbranded why an earth would you want to call it a Nano Style...just by mentioning the word Nano you are implying that it is a look a like of a Apple product!

[uhafmail]

It is not illegal to buy, sell or make these players. This is FACT. Khalid you are wrong. The only thing protected by Apple are the Trademarked names, you can not sell them as iPod Nanos. You can say Nano Style or Almost a Nano because it is obvious enough that the real company who owns the trademark would not sell a product named as such - similar to why paypalsucks.com is not an infringement on paypals trademark.

If you need evidence of this look up a case Apple vs Luxpro a few years ago. Luxpro had a near identical player to Apples shuffle but also called a Shuffle. Apple took Luxpro to court and Luxpro were forced to change the NAME of their product and not the design.

[theimporter]

Hmmm

Food for thought, there are some valid points here and a good debate on the subject will no doubt educate those of us who are so clued up apparently.

Still sticking to my guns tho...a copy is a copy, call it what you want...A rose by any other name is still a rose!

Good debate tho...keep it going people!

[Pete]

First off, this thread is a paid ad.

As a paid advertiser here, you should understand that someone's paid thread is not the place for this kind of discussion.

You have every right to start a new thread questioning the sales of unbranded goods, but you should not be doing so in someone's thread.

The difference is that these are not sold as Apple products, there is no logo of any sort on the units, and there is no mention of Apple or Nano or iPod anywhere on the unit or the accompanying materials. What it boils down to is there is no attempt to sell as a genuine Apple product.

However the internet is full of FAKE, true FAKE, goods. Shoes, clothes, etc.

This is not the case. What we are selling is no different than you going into a major retailer, or even a corner mini-mart and finding "no name" products on the shelf. Or "store brand" private label goods. The applesauce at the grocery may come down the same assembly line as the name brand, but it has a different label and sells for less. You, as a consumer, have the choice of the name brand(s) offered at the store, the private label "store brand" or in some cases a truly generic "plain brown wrapper" no name what-so-ever (except what is legally required in the case of food).

Same here. These units are made by the same people who make the private labels for major retailers, who may actually produce some for Apple. But they are not ever called Apple, never promoted as such. They are the "plain white wrapper" of the electronics world, just as there are "white box" computer components and other unbranded products in all sorts of product ranges.

Your lack of understanding this shows you are not very well versed in the world of trade. You can buy unbranded musical instruments. Unbranded just about anything. You claim to be The Importer, but have little understanding of the world of commerce.

And you further spoil your standing by jumping into this thread being you are another advertiser and possible competitor.
.

[studio1one]

Originally Posted by theimporter

Hmmm

Food for thought, there are some valid points here and a good debate on the subject will no doubt educate those of us who are so clued up apparently.

Still sticking to my guns tho...a copy is a copy, call it what you want...A rose by any other name is still a rose!

Good debate tho...keep it going people!

stick to whatever guns you like, whether it is a fake or a similar product is set by a court of law. Precedent has been set on this on many ocassions.

The kahlid Kola one being a prime example, have you not seen the 100's of different cola on the market?

you could put it in exactly the same bottle, have the same drink and as long as you don't call it coca cola or use their logo there is no problem.

[bondandco]

As far as im concerned there is no debate.

The only one debating is you "theimporter".

There is no "food for thought" as your simply wrong and to express your very opinionated views originally on my advertising thread shows what a lack of respect you have other peoples advertisements on the forum especially when your opinions are not even based on correct information or facts.

I and other sellers may have lost potential customers because of your lack of knowledge on the product.

Regards

John

[uhafmail]

Originally Posted by theimporter

Hmmm

Food for thought, there are some valid points here and a good debate on the subject will no doubt educate those of us who are so clued up apparently.

Still sticking to my guns tho...a copy is a copy, call it what you want...A rose by any other name is still a rose!

Good debate tho...keep it going people!

You what? It is not food for thought this is fact. Do you not think that if Apple could have sued Luxpro over copying their design too they would have done?

[D M]

Why don't I see any of these in the big shops?