AR Sponsor
Posted: 7/2/2009 10:09:28 AM EDT
|
i recently bought a used flip up front sight of the EE. it should up a little while ago. it is clearly the sight in the picture, but it is a samson, rather than the pri it was advertised as. i admit that it is partly my fault for not paying closer attention, but i had done some research on the pri and had decided it was what i wanted. so are these two sights close in quality? should i just suck it up and keep the samson, or contact the seller about this? what you do if you were in that position? fwiw, i think its an honest mistake. -matt |
|
Samson makes good stuff...but if you want a PRI then get a PRI.
I'd rather have a PRI only because Samson has a reputation of copying other manufacturers designs rather than making their own unique stuff, which I think is not cool. The stuff they make is legit strength wise though. If you got a good deal just sell it on the EE and buy a PRI. |
|
Quoted:
Samson makes good stuff...but if you want a PRI then get a PRI. I'd rather have a PRI only because Samson has a reputation of copying other manufacturers designs rather than making their own unique stuff, which I think is not cool. The stuff they make is legit strength wise though. If you got a good deal just sell it on the EE and buy a PRI. I assume you are talking about the Troy rail. Samson helped design it, so felt he was entitled to make it also. I think the court found correctly as Samson was paid for his design work. That situation is far different they what you have suggested. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Samson makes good stuff...but if you want a PRI then get a PRI. I'd rather have a PRI only because Samson has a reputation of copying other manufacturers designs rather than making their own unique stuff, which I think is not cool. The stuff they make is legit strength wise though. If you got a good deal just sell it on the EE and buy a PRI. I assume you are talking about the Troy rail. Samson helped design it, so felt he was entitled to make it also. I think the court found correctly as Samson was paid for his design work. That situation is far different they what you have suggested. WRONG! Troy Industries won a $505,000.00 judgment against Samson Manufacturing and Scott Samson. Link PursuitSS |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Samson makes good stuff...but if you want a PRI then get a PRI. I'd rather have a PRI only because Samson has a reputation of copying other manufacturers designs rather than making their own unique stuff, which I think is not cool. The stuff they make is legit strength wise though. If you got a good deal just sell it on the EE and buy a PRI. I assume you are talking about the Troy rail. Samson helped design it, so felt he was entitled to make it also. I think the court found correctly as Samson was paid for his design work. That situation is far different they what you have suggested. WRONG! Troy Industries won a $505,000.00 judgment against Samson Manufacturing and Scott Samson. Link PursuitSS Yes... or No?... Samson didn't go buy one in a store any copy it. Troy hired him to assist on the design of project. Then Samson ran with the design also. (was pursueing his own patent on it) He was wrong to do that and that is what the court found. |
|
Quoted:
Samson was subcontracted to manufacture Troy's design. In other words Troy didn't have enough capacity to meet demand so they farmed out production. Samson didn't assist in the design work, that is why the judgment exceeded half a million dollars! As I understood it it was Troy's concept and he went to Samson for some engineering/design/AutoCAD stuff. But even if you are totally correct, it supports what I was trying address up so it would not be repeated. He is not just going around and copying designs... |
|
"The jury’s finding that Samson engaged in unfair and deceptive business practices entitles Troy to an award of its attorney fees and costs.
The trade secrets at issue were for… Troy’s ideas, inventions, designs and drawings of the Modular Rail Fore-end, for which Troy was recently issued US Patent No. 7,216,451. Also at issue were Troy’s designs and drawings for the Forward Handgrip and its Scope Mount. These products are Troy’s designs for accessorizing the M16 rifle and carbine used by our military in training and in combat abroad, including the Middle East. Troy is a designer of military weapons and weapons accessories. Stephen P. Troy, President of Troy Industries said, “This vindicates me. The decision of the jury clearly shows these were my ideas, my designs and my inventions from the very beginning.” Damian R. LaPlaca, of Donovan Hatem LLP, Troy’s lead trial counsel, added, “This means that when you steal somebody’s trade secrets and ideas and try to pass them off as your own, you’ll have to pay.” |
|
Were I you, I would definitely contact the seller. If you thought you were purchasing PRI, and the seller advertised PRI, then you should have PRI. Both you and the seller made errors by not recognizing the item in the picture was a Samson, but it is the seller's responsibility to be correct, not yours. If it was advertised as a PRI, then it should be made right.
Now, if the seller won't make it right and you are stuck with the Samson, I think Samson makes good quality products and it will probably serve you well. That doesn't mean the seller shouldn't make things right and offer you a refund and return shipping. If he doesn't, it should be made known that this particular seller will sell items that are not as advertised and will not make right on his own mistake. The feedback system is designed for this sort of situation, when a seller won't make good on his own mistakes. ~Icarus |
AR Sponsor