Humper and RadioCopier systems

[Wayne]

Some of you may know of the brands Humper (Jumper) and the new startup RadioCopier (Radiomaster). What you may not know is the history. I really do try to keep out of this sort of stuff, but seems they are now threatening my business and I do not take lightly to that.

The key player in the startup of both of these companies, and many others is a single person. I have been doing business with this individual for many years as he has worked at a number of places. He basically got his start with FrSky in the early years, I think he was in sales. He left them went to work for Hobby King and left there and eventually played a roll in starting up Humper. At the time Humper made cheap RC products that mostly didn't work. We bought some of those products but they could not be sold as they were very poor. Then they got into transmitters, but they did not sell. Hmm, what to do? Oh, hey let's copy the FrSky QX7 circuit for circuit and see if that will sell. It worked, they got some sales, hmm, how to boost the sales ? Let's attack FrSky publicly and claims all kinds of made up stuff. OK - That is working great, let's copy the X10 now, again circuit by circuit and this time spend money getting endorsements from youtubers with low morals and have them spread more lies and attacks on FrSky.

For all of this I remained pretty quiet.

Then the partners of Humper tossed out this original guy for some reason and he started a copy of the copy and now we have RadioCopiers.

I was still on their mailing list and they are eager to get sales so they kept emailing me about their coming clone radio. Ughh. I sent them this email to get them to stop:

Sorry Vivian I am not interested in the Radiocopier products regardless of haw many times you send me the same email.

Please stop.

Here is the response:

Wayne

I respect you a lot before as you surpported me many years .

please show your respect ,shut up saying radiocopier !

how shitty you are to say that ! Vivian willl delete you from our mail list .

What a shame you said that . Radiocopier ?

you are selling tons of copy shit ! You are a shitty copier seller and BANDTURD dealer !

for business ,YOU WENT around us and said bad things about our company .

Just SHUT UP ! Let us see what good result you will have .

Owen

For the record I have posted very little on the subject, and only to set the record straight.

To be clear, these companies despite their claims have no engineering staff, have no R&D and do nothing to further the hobby. They only steal from other companies. As far as I know they have no service centers and no technical support. They do not have a legal RF system as they have lied to the FCC to gain a certificate for their MPM module. They are banned from competitions and events due to insurance not covering MPM modules as they are guessing at guide codes from reputable manufacturers.

Aloft Hobbies will have nothing to do with these companies or any of their sister companies. We do our best to track down quality manufacturers that make this hobby a better place.

 

[tenten8401]

how to boost the sales ? Let's attack FrSky publicly and claims all kinds of made up stuff. OK - That is working great,

I'm interested to see what claims Jumper/Radiomaster have made on FrSky as if they made any I haven't seen them yet (although I don't doubt they may have made some, not really defending them). What I have seen is FrSky sending out anti-competitive letters threatening retailers if they sell Jumper products.

have no R&D and do nothing to further the hobby. They only steal from other companies.

Just wanted to add that FrSky started off doing the same thing and made multiprotocol hardware, which you do sell: https://alofthobbies.com/frsky-delta-8.html
As well as straight ripping JR's radio:

Again not defending Radiomaster here, but FrSky is far from perfect.

Interesting to know that MPM modules aren't allowed at events, kinda makes sense though since they're all from different places with varying degrees of quality. That reply from Radiomaster was unwarranted, they should've taken your email off the list when you asked.

 

[Konrad]

1010, Help me out.

What are you showing us?
That both the Taranis plus and JR XP9303 are hand held radios rather than tray radio?
That both radios have switches on the face and along the top of the radio?
That the LCD screen is towards the bottom of the front face.
That the antennas come out the top?
Other than the the side sliders and navigation buttons all three radios, the the late 80's ACE MicroPro 8000 (see attached), Taranis plus and JR XP9303 all look the same to my eye. There is little to differentiate the TX bodies. OK, the Ace has very very nice metal gimbals and a large metal grounding plane in the metal body . But that was more a price point feature.

What leads you to think the dual stick hand held TX is a rip off of JR. I used a similar radio with the E.K. Logic Control and Kraft radio from the 60's. If looking at the esthetics I see a lot of differences, inner top face switch style and navigation buttons and scroller and side sliders.

As to the RX they are using what I think is the same 2.4 gHz TI chip set. Receivers are a vastly different animal to the FCC than the transmiter. Not sure about the RX source code. If it is stollen or not.

I can tell you that when dealing with the federal administrative courts. If you are claiming to have the same functionality you'll have to demonstrate how you came up with it. Ether by test and computation (reverse engineered) of by similarity (proof by comparing to a print or documents). If doing by similarity the court will ask for documentation showing that you have legal access to the print and documents.

That test part is a problem for most as it costs a lot to test to get certification. I know as I used both methods to get parts manufactured for the aircraft under my maintenance programs.

I suspect this gentleman had prints and documents that are not legal for him to use for the manufacture of a competitive product.

As to FrSky leveraging their market strength I'm not sure what the current law is about anti competitive practices.

All the best,
Konrad

 

[Doc J]

This is a story with a plot I know so well.

These stories never have a happy ending.

Sorry to see we have one more parasitic entity.

Doc.

 

[tenten8401]

What are you showing us?

Just wanted to show how they started off by essentially cloning a radio design from JR and cloning Futaba and Hitec protocols. You can't deny the similarities between the designs of the two radios.

As to FrSky leveraging their market strength I'm not sure what the current law is about anti compeditive practices.

I'm no lawyer but I'm pretty sure this falls under the case they're describing here (which the FTC won):

On the other hand, a manufacturer with market power may potentially use these types of vertical arrangements to prevent smaller competitors from succeeding in the marketplace. For instance, exclusive contracts may be used to deny a competitor access to retailers or distributors without which the competitor cannot make sufficient sales to be viable. For example, the FTC found that a manufacturer of pipe fittings unlawfully maintained its monopoly in domestically-made ductile iron fittings by requiring its distributors to buy domestic fittings exclusively from it and not from its competitors, who were attempting to enter the domestic market. The FTC found that this manufacturer's policy foreclosed a competitor from achieving the sales needed to compete effectively.

Exclusive Dealing or Requirements Contracts

Exclusive dealing or requirements contracts between manufacturers and retailers are common and are generally lawful.

www.ftc.gov

This is a story with a plot I know so well.

These stories never have a happy ending.

Sorry to see we have one more parasitic entity.

Doc.

Yeah, it sucks we can't just have companies not trying to step on eachother, but in this case I don't believe Jumper/RM has done anything wrong here (except for attacking FrSky and cloning Futaba's radio shells). Both the "DIY Multiprotocol Module" firmware they use and OpenTX are open source under the GPL (v3 and v2 respectively) which both permit commercial use and distribution. DIY Multiprotocol Module even goes as far as to straight up publish the PCB files (again under GPL) while OpenTX has the pin definitions on what goes where in the firmware. It's not just the same board internally. If they just straight up copied FrSky they probably wouldn't be having this plague of ribbon cable issues

 

[Wayne]

Yes, Frsky sent out emails to dealers that were selling Humper radios. This is fully in their right to do so. This is why you don't see a Ford dealership selling new VWs. They are all cars aren't they? Now please keep in mind that FrSky has not sent letters telling dealers they could not sell JR, Jeti, Futaba, Spektrum or any other radios just Humper. No other company has cloned FrSky circuits. It was not something they could allow. There is nothing wrong with FrSky taking this action. I have had similar emails from companies like TBS. (One of the reasons we are dumping TBS.) I will say the practice is not very common in the hobby. More common in the drone market.

Delta 8 receiver is the work of an RF genius in the UK. He developed his own firmware and was burning it onto FrSky receivers and selling them. When demand grew he asked FrSky to supply them ready to go. This is not a clone as it is using FrSky circuits and original firmware that is compatible to the Hitec and Futaba RF systems. It has no code copied from another brand, it is a fully legal product. This is not a clone. Much like an Orange or Lemon receiver is fully legal for the Spektrum arena.

Here is the funny part about the shell design - FrSky bought that from KST. Guess who worked for KST and still does? Owen. JR had retired the design and never commented on its use. I do agree I wish they had used their own design. They have certainly taken inspiration for case designs from others. The originally redundancy buss is very similar looking to a Jeti, but the internals and programming are 100% FrSky.

Let's face it, having clone manufacturers is almost a praise that you have been doing something really well. Frsky has brought us more power and functionality than this hobby has ever seen, and they have made it so everyone can afford it! That has been a total revolution to the radio market. We sell a radio for under $100 that has 24 fully proportional channels and basically unlimited mixing capabilities. I can sell that radio to someone brand new in the hobby, and it could be the first and last radio they will ever need in the hobby. That has never been true before.

The FrSky radios use OpenSource firmwares, OpenTX or ER9X. The other aspects of the radio are not OpenSource. The RF system is locked down just like Spektrum, Futaba, Jeti, etc. The hardware in the FrSky radios is not OpenSource, it is not legal for Humper or others to copy. FrSky has spent a lot of money and effort to perfect their designs. Their production facility is world class. Ask any electronics engineer to take a look inside your radio and see what he thinks of the quality. This is not by chance, this is the result of constant reinvestment into the products and the company all so they can give you a better and better product.

In summary:
Yes, they sent the letters - perfectly normal and accepted in the business world. They only target clone manufacturers.
Delta 8 - is not originally a FrSky product, but is not a clone.
Taranis X9D case design -

 

[Wayne]

If you look at the Jumper radios they are line for line identical copies of the FrSky radios. Yes, they rearranged component locations to make them look different, but they are direct copies. They use lower quality components, but otherwise the same. Instead of the IXJT module they use an off the shelf MPM design, funny thing is they copied circuits dedicated to the FrSky IXJT that serves no function in their radios since they use the MPM. How do you explain that away?

 

[Dennis]

Wayne
While i certainly sympathize with what your saying of the stealing of designs don't think much can be done about it because modelers will buy this stuff because it's cheap most don't care about the fact that a company has invested time and money into a design only to find another company has taken the design made a small change and call it there own the Chinese have been doing this for way to long it sucks i have had my design's copied in Europe and in China and while i complained no one gave a dam about it

 

[Wayne]

I agree - But we can at least tell the story.

I was just looking at the Humper manual and thought it is better then they are capable of. It looks like a watered down Futaba manual. So pulled up a Futaba manual for the T14SG.
on page 14 we see this graphic:

And here is the Humper version from their manual:

 

[tenten8401]

funny thing is they copied circuits dedicated to the FrSky IXJT that serves no function in their radios since they use the MPM.

Is this related to the noinv firmware requirement for telemetry on the internal module? I guess I can't really explain that but it would be proof they're just straight copying the design which sucks. The manual picture you just linked is pretty damning for them too :/

At the end of the day I just want a radio that can bind to all my stuff without requiring me carry around 2 or 3 different radios or modules and no other company has released anything like that yet but Jumper/RM, while FrSky is busy locking out my D8 and older stuff from new radios (only reason we got D16 was a huge amount of backlash). The internal 4in1 module does that well and as far as I can tell isn't borrowing code but rather it just being compatible hardware as you said earlier. I really can't defend Jumper any further though, their QC is clearly lacking as evidenced by the USB-C board they released that would melt itself when you tried charging..

I still don't agree that FrSky's letter was right though, you mentioned dealerships but there are several multi-franchise dealerships that exist. The difference with the Ford ones is they are Ford franchises that specialize on one brand. Telling general retailers that have the choice to sell whatever they want not to sell X product to prevent a competitor from selling units I'm fairly certain would be considered anti-competitive under the FTC article I linked earlier, mainly because the retailers wanted to sell these goods to begin with but can't because they want the smaller competitor gone. The main difference here for me is it's not an agreement to only sell FrSky goods, but rather an agreement that prevents you from selling a specific company's goods when others are fine. Again not a lawyer though, I could be wrong.

 

[Konrad]

1010,
Like I said, to my eye (I'm an engineer not an artist) all three the Ace, JR and FrSky look very similar for the reasons given. In the days of TX impounds all the Asian radios actually looked the same. It was the American radios with their huge grounding plane (aluminum boxes) that “looked” different.

If looking at the JR and FrSky from an esthetic perspective I see a lot of differences. The switch styles on the upper front face, the programing interface 4 vs 3 buttons on the left and the scroll bar on the right. The speaker flower also looks different. The housings of each brand will NOT fit in the molds of the other brand. So where is the idea that the FrSky is a clone of the older JR model?

But back to the function of the form they both still look rather close in layout to the much more ancient Ace. Which again is a basically a two stick layout with bottom screen, nothing new or unique. The only major change I see is in the side sliders. Anyway I think JR had abandoned that “style” of radio for the ill advised Battle Star Galactica Cylon motif.

Code. The functionality is rarely patentable. Rather it is how does the code achieve the functionality. Bill Gates was famous for adding lines and lines of code that did nothing. He would pull these up in a dispute and show that they did nothing and that the only way those lines would be in a competitors code was it they stole the code out right. (one would not have had those lines in any code that had been reverse engineered as they were not functioning code. So while the RX you list does work across many protocols the way it is accomplished is unique to the RX and not a violation of any patentable feature. (There may be trade mark issue putting the name of a product used by other brands, but that’s another legal hurdle).

It appears that the mother boards of the Jumper and Radio master have such features, as to show that the boards are copied not reverse engineered.

The law is an Ass! I’m not sure how your plumbing supplier example will stand up to legal scrutiny when applied to the FrSky letter. I do know that vendor and suppliers often have burdensome requirement that appear to be anti-competitive, but have past the required legal standards. There is the dealership model. And then there are clause like those used by Boeing. That a vendor to Boeing need to have “X” amount of capitalization.

So if you have an idea or a product that is a game changer Boeing will not allow it unless you can show that you won’t go bankrupt should there be a strike or some kind of supply chain interruption. This is why we see the same suppliers time and time again. GE, UTC, Honeywell etc. will buy out the firm for the technology that the small guy has, and call it their own. If the small guy doesn’t give in, to the buyout the idea and product doesn’t make it on to the Boeing aircraft until the big boys can break the patent. If the big boys can’t break the patent the little guy might survive selling to the second tier aircraft manufacture like Airbus of Embraer.

All the best,
Konrad

 

[Konrad]

Wayne,
I'm sorry but I don't see where your graphic is making your point. The TX's look very different and the perspective is very different. I'd say the art work was different enough as to be unique.

 

[Dennis]

And where would a company take chinese companies to court (world court HAHA) here's a story for ya mercedes benz had one of their models copied by the chinese exact copy mercedes took china to court in the world court for year's finally the chinese said they would change the model they produced they took the mercedes emblem and turned it upside down but still made the car for as long as the chinese wanted to and someone bought them.

 

[Konrad]

Not just Chinese companies. But let's take a look at US firms. As I recall the FCC has $2 billion* in outstanding fines against US firms. To date they have only collected on $300K*.

Ok, $2 billon is in the noise when it come to the Feds. And as long as these firms have the law maker and policy makers in their back pocket for less than the $2 billion nothing will change here in the great USA.

* The actual numbers are not accurate but the order of magnitude of the fines verses to collection is correct.

 

[Dennis]

Money rules the day nuff said.

 

[Wayne]

FrSky had 2 very good reasons to remove D8.

1. It is not legal in the EU, a very important market for FrSky.
2. The sales of D8 receivers had dried up after 8 years.

The D8 protocol died as soon as the X8R rolled out with the D16 protocol 8 years ago, but FrSky kept them available to support those that used them. Eventually the EU required LBT and they were then dead.

So why is anyone upset over the loss of D8? Well, some less drone companies didn't want to buy the Frsky XM receiver for a couple of bucks, instead they went with a rather poor D8 clone. The D8 clones were based on some reverse engineering from an RC Groups member (as I recall) and it had some flaws as it was not a finished project, but he made his work public and it got rushed into production as D8 clones receivers and flight controllers. They usually worked. Lots of folks had these in tiny whoop clones, etc. Humper took this opportunity to try and make FrSky look bad and they came up with some story about locking users out of D8. Far from the truth. I can still add D8 onto an ACCESS transmitter using nothing but FrSky products. I remember these early shitty D8 products as I got to try and provide technical support for the stupid things. How come my new D8 drone wont bind? Why does this FrSky receiver have no range? Well, it was a mystery for a few days... It wasn't from FrSky.

Let's discuss the MPM module. I'm not a pro, but it is my understanding that these are not legal devices. For a manufacturer to get FCC certification they have to test and disclose the actual use of the product. Humper did not do this. They made up a fake firmware and tested a very small part of the hardware. The first thing a Humper user does is download the MPM module firmware to "unlock" the other features. Well, those other features are not legal transmissions from that module. Considering the $15,000 per unit fine for importing something like that, you would have to be insane to sell it here or in the EU. Lets look at the add for one such company:

Look, right in the title of the product, Multi-Protocol RF Module. In the body they state:"The internal multi-protocol module allows you to bind to just about any 2.4GHz receiver"

Not like this is some secret. But the FCC knew nothing of this. Why? I'm guessing the same for the CE, assuming they have CE certification.

Remember how I stated D8 is not legal in the EU, well, how would you get an MPM past the CE certification if D8 was present? They have a number of other protocols that are not legal either.

The reality is these MPM modules are not safe, they are bad for the hobby as they take away our built in security of our radio transmissions as the clone companies can only guess at the guide codes. The OpenSource project for MPMs does not make the process legal.

You have many options for producing different RF protocols. First off, stop buying toy grade stuff that uses clone RF systems. If you want to transmit Spektrum's protocols then buy one of their radios or a module. There are tons of them in the used market. If you want to use FrSky receivers, then buy a FrSky module or Transmitter. It isn't that tough.

When you use an MPM you risk shooting down other planes as the guide codes are randomly guessed at. Could be the code that someone actually bought and paid for when they purchased the real radio. Some say the chance of that is lie winning the lottery, but it has happened. And the radios that actually let you enter your own guide code are especially dangerous!

 

[Wayne]

And where would a company take chinese companies to court...

Sadly, that is why these companies exist. They exist in a "catch me if you can" grey area. They will make your life a living hell if you attack them, but they are free to attack you all day long. They do not operate within the law, they sell a product that is a copy and they lie to the FCC, Customs and just laugh at customers that were sold garbage. Buyer be ware. They tend to be breaking laws on both sides of the border. They will not exist heavily into their companies as they can get shut down at anytime. But don't worry, they will pop up with a new name very soon. We already see that with the offspring of Humper -->RadioCopiers.

 

[tenten8401]

About the whole lying to the FCC thing, FrSky has done the same thing with their Vantac multiprotocol module. It's not really new for these Chinese companies.
Also would you mind elaborating on what a guide code is? Is this just a unique ID in the transmitter? How many different codes are there?

 

[HENNY]

Copying the look of a product is done all the time by all companies, look at Iphones , Samsung phones etc. Look at the car industry etc etc. But FRsky have done all their own engineering and made huge leaps forward in the radio control hobby including Telemetry that is as good as the best available.

With regards to Jumper T16, they are now on version-3 in a very short time frame as the previous products have been unreliable or cheaply made. Too bad if you purchased the previous models, so now buy all over again. Would have been cheaper to purchase the FRsky reliable product and have local support.

Obtaining FCC or EU approval is a costly process that ensures correct RF operation within those regions RF laws. Don't believe Jumper did this process at all as their MPM is actually a 4 in 1 so they would need to have four FCC approvals for the 4 in 1 MPM module which they don't have.

Support your local suppliers and get a great, reliable product that has local support.

 

[Doc J]

Me? I'm a dyed in the wool copier.

Look at my latest model: Stormbird Forza 108 - damned if its not an F15 copy...I mean it has two wings, a fuselage with a vertical stabiliser and two tailplane halves EXACTLY like the veteran USA fighter.

Guilty as charged.

I'm surely headed directly to hell for that one...

Doc.