Rebel,

Give everyone their money back (without requireing a return).
and
Dont ever sell another knock off, mention me or my products again.
and

And I will forget about it.

Edit: Whatever the moderators want to do with you is entirely up to them.

 

Without knowing the background of the two accused here, just by reading the posts you can clearly tell that Rebel has something to hide. First calling out Tony then wanting to squash it when all hell broke loose. If you have nothing to hide, then why avoid all the questions? Why not give detailed evidence to back up your story? You don't have to be a detective to tell who's lying here.

Rebel, if you wanted to prove that the Mrev2 indeed doesn't provide any gains, then why not purchase one off a vendor, test it, and post your results?

 

MREV2 FTWFW!!

Dont believe me or Tony or any of the many independent tests???
Here is mine. Installed by Tony at Motordyne and dyno'd while I stood there in awe. Need more proof??

 

..... You should have just waited for the evidence to prove itself, instead of shooting from the hip...

Now you look the a$$..

 

I do not and have not ever advertised in Modified Magazine but they recently did a dyno of the MREV2 and spacer.

I havn't even seen their dyno plots yet.

But look for their independant test results.
Is that independant and credible enough?

 

The pix look like mine which is Mrev+ where the runner 1 and 2 is milled. Also the quality is good and not flat like the fake one.

 

so are the fakes genuine (or fake?) oem non-revup lower plenum, with maching done and sold under MD's "MREV2" title=trademark infringement, fraud, false pretenses; as Tony already pointed out. If the machining process is a copy of Tony's patented process, than add patent infringement to the list.

RI, idk if you are prepared for what could be coming, if the above is true.

Tony has a lot of legal options as a valid patent and trademark holder in the U.S. with preliminary injunctions and such you could soon find all your stock of plenums in your basement seized by the court, along with your machining equipment pending a case outcome.

Tony is smart to not reveal his trade secrets, because once they are known, they no longer are protected. Trade secrets are a specific kind of IP that are protected in a much different way than copyrights, trademarks, or patents. RI, you are not very smart if you think Tony will/should reveal his trade secret on a public forum.

personally I think Tony has done a lot of good for the VQ community and has shared more than enough and contributed much more than enough to get the benefit of the doubt on these boards.

u on the other hand...

 

RebelRI- I suggest you answer these questions ASAP. If you want to PM me your side of the story then please do so. As it stand right now you're on the verge of losing you sponsorship and possibly access to this site as well as G35driver. I'm giving you a chance to come clean and/or explain how everyone is confusing this situation. Tony is a long standing and very respected member of this community...if you're going to call him out you better have an overwhelming amount of evidence proving your claims.

 

OK,

I have the pictures.

I will send them to Admin and moderators only. (Johnny is this part legally advisable?) Thanks bro!

-------

All interested MY350Z and G35driver Admin and Staff,

PM me a email adress and I will send them directly to you.

Thank you,
Tony

 

I just finished reading through this entire thread. The only point of discussion that has not been clarified is Civic's apparent lack of knowledge of what "MREV" means.

To clarify, the term "MREV" is the trademarked name of a product manufactured by Motordyne Engineering. "MREV" is NOT a stock non-revup lower collector. "MREV" is the name given to the product after Motordyne modifies a stock non-revup lower collector.

IIRC, Motordyne has had three iterations of this product, the original "MREV", the updated "MREV+", and the currently produced "MREV2". The names are sometimes used interchangeably in discussion, but they should not be confused as being an identical product. This would be like saying that Windows 95 is the same as Windows XP and Windows Vista.

 

The original "MREV" to my knowledge was a non-revup lower plenum without any modifications. someone please correct me if I'm wrong... The MREV+ and MREV2 were modifications added in addition by Tony's research and development.

nevertheless I'll post here what I posted in the other thread :

thanks to whomever circled the red lines on there it makes credible before what words could no describe clearly.

citymunky's clearly does not look like an MREV2 but rather a plain non-revuplower collector. the M-R1 noted on the side is an obvious giveaway.

boooooo for RebelinRI for selling it as an MREV2.

 

Have the pic's of the suspected "fakes" sent to you directly for review. I wouldn't send out any pictures revealing your trade secrets to anyone, especially via the internet (sorry admins/mod's--just what I honestly think). Who knows, this whole thing could be a masterfully planned attempt by RI or others to help reveal your trade secrets/patented process, in attempts to make a derivative one of their own in the future (whether legal or not).

Also, while not required, it might make things easier to start some kind of marking process of future MREV2's that are produced which would help identify its authenticity.

 

Or we could just purchase one of his plenums and copy it rather than creating an elaborate plan to get his pics

 

Perhaps, but if you were the owner of protected IP rights (with legal implications for publicizing his secrets--no matter how few times to anyone but his attorney or hired machinists, and might be entering litigation), wouldn't you want to err on the safe side and cover your butt?

 

Sure--but its' obviously not that easy to do just by looking at Tony's finished product, now is it? There is obviosly some kind of "trade secret" that Tony has for his process--once that's revealed or pointed out by him to others--he loses his rights to enforce that trade secret. Why make it easier to those that wish to copy Tony's work? (not necessarily to "improve" upon it, but just to make a higher profit--that is not in terms with promoting the progress of science and the arts, but rather enters in the area of unfair competition and actually hinders progress because is lessens the incentives for makers to produce in the first place)

 

Does anybody else feel like they're in court?

 

So take out the "masterplan", it still isn't a good idea for Tony (from an attorney's perspective) to point out and publicize where his trade secrets lie to anyone--clearly it is not discernable from a general photo--but from a direct photo of the area(s) from Tony; I dunno.

Really I'm not Tony's attorney and the pm I had with him was not in any way made in giving him professional legal advice. This is just my opinion. Sorry that you disagree with it.