[Elecraft] MFJ's new Internal K3 Tuner, anyone tried one yet?

[Fred Townsend]

Yes I am absolutely sure. If patented there must be a patent notice. I see none. 
As far a being a big seller think about it. The next firmware 
change from Elecraft could contain a clone detector and shut down operation if it sees a clone. The user would need to remove the clone to resume operation. The user would be out whatever they paid for the clone hardware. The mere thought of such an occurrence would reduce the resale value too. Where is the bargain in that?

Patents are a sticky wicket that can down a small company in litigation costs. A patent is a license to sue or be sued. Many companies prefer to use copyrights. They last longer and do not require any novelty claims. This doesn't always work either. Recall the first IBM clone computers. IBM's BIOS said 'copyright IBM'. Their OS would look for the 'IBM' when booting so the clone BIOS said 'compatible with IBM'. The OS saw the 'IBM' and booted. 

Spy vrs Spy. 

Fred, AE6QL
-----Original Message-----
>From: Brian Hemmis <bhemmis at mac.com>
>Sent: May 12, 2015 5:29 PM
>To: Fred Townsend <fptownsend at earthlink.net>
>Cc: Phil Wheeler <w7ox at socal.rr.com>, Elecraft Reflector <Elecraft at mailman.qth.net>
>Subject: Re: [Elecraft] MFJ's new Internal K3 Tuner, anyone tried one yet?
>
>Fred, Are you sure about the design not being patented (I have no clue about this stuff) ? Ethics (or lack of) are exactly what I was speaking about…
>Somehow I don’t see this tuner being a big seller. People who purchase high end products like the K3 aren’t about to skimp on unknown products from manufacturers known for producing generally lower end items.