Intellivision Amico’s trademark changed to ‘abandoned’

[+GoldLeader]

15 hours ago, Rev said:

Some family friendly console. That was no accident.
 

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phallic_architecture

 

12 hours ago, Spriggy said:

 

It should actually look like this ......

 

 

If you build it they will come...

[MrBeefy]

23 minutes ago, GoldLeader said:

 

 

If you build it they will come...

I would like to buy one in Petrified Wood, and one in Unicorn Poop Green!

[+GoldLeader]

What's Funny/Shocking/Astonishing/Telling here is that Gaterooze did in 3 days what IE has had years to not do...But to me it wouldn't be "Intellivision" without a woodgrained crapfest of an UglyAss, Overpriced console,  that obviously comes with a Buttfest of a crap controller...Those complete the experience!

 

 Get those and you can forget that SONY, Nintendo, Evercade, PlayDate, and Atari VCS 2600 still Exist!

[mr_me]

1 hour ago, gaterooze_ink said:

mr_me seems to be ignoring the fact that any real company doing actual pilot runs with a manufacturer would not use fake stickers because they would actually have their FCC certification by that point. Doing a pilot production run without your certs locked up is insanity. So no, it isn't normal.

No, I just said that I don't think these are from a pilot of the hardware manufacturing process.  Generally speaking, you can get your fcc certification after the pre-production stage of manufacturing.  If there are any changes to the product due to component supply for example, it could be subject to recertification anyway.  And this company has already claimed to have had their prototype tested and found to be within fcc rf emissions standards,  (If that's not the case then they would know).

 

2 hours ago, MrBeefy said:

Technically aren't Mullis, DJC, and Creep all paying customers? They have claimed they are not employees of the company, yet recieved their product. Could that then make these consumer units? They even came in as John Alvarado put it, "Retail Boxes". I know it's a stretch, but even if these units aren't co sumer units they still violated FCC regulations.

If according to the field testing agreement these units are the property of the company then they aren't consumer units.  If these guys have deposits in then they haven't even paid half of what they would owe, nor are they the founders editions they ordered.

 

These prototypes could be in violation of fcc rules.  The Amico is not yet a product in the market however.

 

1 hour ago, MrBeefy said:

But not ignoring it would be admission that his lord and savior of Intellivision, Tommy, would have lied to him about being on the launchpad.

 

Don't get into a conversation with him about launchpads. He doesn't seem to grasp the concept of what Tommy was implying. He also believes they passed FCC certs because the company told him. And as he would say they never lie. 🤣

No not ignoring it.  No the implying is just not enough evidence for certain accusations.  No, their engineer said they didn't submit for fcc certification.  And no I never said that.

Edited June 18, 2023 by mr_me

[roots.genoa]

[MrBeefy]

52 minutes ago, GoldLeader said:

What's Funny/Shocking/Astonishing/Telling here is that Gaterooze did in 3 days what IE has had years to not do...But to me it wouldn't be "Intellivision" without a woodgrained crapfest of an UglyAss, Overpriced console,  that obviously comes with a Buttfest of a crap controller...Those complete the experience!

 

 Get those and you can forget that SONY, Nintendo, Evercade, PlayDate, and Atari VCS 2600 still Exist!

I mean the Playdate even with wanting people to use a crank were still smart enough to put a dead and buttons on the face of the controller.

 

But they also had more interest, popularity, and orders than Intellivision. So Intellivision, as Tommy would say, must be doing something right with their designs since VC investors hate their design as well as potential customers. Winning!

[MrBeefy]

Smash has a new video. He mentions something about Reddit talk about the power brick for Amico. Not sure I followed that part but someone else might.

 

[Cebus Capucinis]

1 hour ago, MrBeefy said:

Smash has a new video. He mentions something about Reddit talk about the power brick for Amico. Not sure I followed that part but someone else might.

 

That video has absolutely everything in the thumbnail that makes me loathe YouTubers and refuse to click on anything. Clickbait title, large bold word in the corner, stupid closeup of a fake overreacting face, and of course none of the thumbnail lines up 100% with the subject matter.

 

I absolutely abhor the "algorithm" and its brainless slaves.

[MrBeefy]

27 minutes ago, Cebus Capucinis said:

That video has absolutely everything in the thumbnail that makes me loathe YouTubers and refuse to click on anything. Clickbait title, large bold word in the corner, stupid closeup of a fake overreacting face, and of course none of the thumbnail lines up 100% with the subject matter.

 

I absolutely abhor the "algorithm" and its brainless slaves.

Well and to be fair, as long as you have been following along it basically has everything me and others have mentioned here. Except Smash doesn't cover how mr_me doesn't believe their engineer Gabe, when he said it failed FCC testing and they didn't retest it.

 

Is it me, or have the units these guys received, morphed from production units to pilot units? Me thinks they have been moving the goalposts backwards.

 

[Rev]

[MattPilz]

8 hours ago, mr_me said:

These units remain the property of the company as far as I know.  There could have been some mention of compliance certifications in the field testing program agreement.   They are pre-release units and not a product for sale.

I have personally received many sample/pre-production/developer electronics from companies over the years as part of contract work or similar. These are all perpetually the property of the company even if they most often never ask for them back. It makes no difference in regards to FCC status. I have never received any that had placeholder IDs or stickers.

 

I just checked one such pre-production sample I have and the IDs are all listed clearly, as well as full disclosures. This is the norm for any product that leaves the very tightly controlled internal testing facilities and in-house engineering cycles, which would include Amicos distributed to others around the country. 

 

 

This device is for engineering product evaluation and development use as permitted in your region. It shall not be marketed, or offered for sale or lease. This device complies with Part 15 of the FCC Rules. Operation is subject to the following two conditions:

1. This device may not cause harmful inteference.
2. This device must accept any interference received, including interference that may cause undesired operation.

And when you look up the FCC IDs, you will find pages upon pages of letters, documentation, photographs and specifications submitted to FCC and approved. This was before these units ever reached external testers.

 

 

[Cebus Capucinis]

That makes sense when they haven't passed. But Amico is already passed. Some guy said so.

[Rowsdower70]

All that they really need is for some guy to say that "It totally would have passed." 

[MrBeefy]

2 hours ago, MattPilz said:

I have personally received many sample/pre-production/developer electronics from companies over the years as part of contract work or similar. These are all perpetually the property of the company even if they most often never ask for them back. It makes no difference in regards to FCC status. I have never received any that had placeholder IDs or stickers.

 

I just checked one such pre-production sample I have and the IDs are all listed clearly, as well as full disclosures. This is the norm for any product that leaves the very tightly controlled internal testing facilities and in-house engineering cycles, which would include Amicos distributed to others around the country. 

 

 

This device is for engineering product evaluation and development use as permitted in your region. It shall not be marketed, or offered for sale or lease. This device complies with Part 15 of the FCC Rules. Operation is subject to the following two conditions:

1. This device may not cause harmful inteference.
2. This device must accept any interference received, including interference that may cause undesired operation.

And when you look up the FCC IDs, you will find pages upon pages of letters, documentation, photographs and specifications submitted to FCC and approved. This was before these units ever reached external testers.

Thanks for showing this.

2 hours ago, Rowsdower70 said:

All that they really need is for some guy to say that "It totally would have passed." 

Actually there was 🤣. Gabe Phan was an engineer who left. He said it failed testing. He then followed up with they fixed it, and would have passed if they took it back to get tested.

 

He might have said should instead of would, but basically the same result of it hasn't passed.

22 hours ago, MattPilz said:

We also see a sudden lack of featured partners compared to John's unboxing.

 

I just double checked this and the two missing are Crayola, and Hot Wheels. I guess you could say this has been a Colossal Crash of a run with partnerships. I hope they have permission to use the MLB logo on a not MLB licensed product. That would probably get them sued quicker than the others would.

 

I think that means Side Swipers will not get the Mattel branding. This is what happens when you spend money buying dumb licenses when you don't have stuff buttoned up. My guess would be the contract time ran out.

 

Crayola they listed on Fundable until I think someone received word there was no partnership. It was then removed from Fundable.

 

I actually do believe that Tommy was an idiot, and spent dumb amounts of money on licenses despite not having a dev or game lined out. He's definitely a spending equates to importance type of person.

 

Speaking of Hot Wheels. I don't know if this is any good, but I like the looks of it. Might ne worth checking out while you wait for the highly creatively named Amico Auto Racing to arrive.

https://store.steampowered.com/app/2312380/Steel_Racer/

 

[mr_me]

3 hours ago, MattPilz said:

I have personally received many sample/pre-production/developer electronics from companies over the years as part of contract work or similar. These are all perpetually the property of the company even if they most often never ask for them back. It makes no difference in regards to FCC status. I have never received any that had placeholder IDs or stickers.

 

I just checked one such pre-production sample I have and the IDs are all listed clearly, as well as full disclosures. This is the norm for any product that leaves the very tightly controlled internal testing facilities and in-house engineering cycles, which would include Amicos distributed to others around the country. 

 

 

This device is for engineering product evaluation and development use as permitted in your region. It shall not be marketed, or offered for sale or lease. This device complies with Part 15 of the FCC Rules. Operation is subject to the following two conditions:

1. This device may not cause harmful inteference.
2. This device must accept any interference received, including interference that may cause undesired operation.

And when you look up the FCC IDs, you will find pages upon pages of letters, documentation, photographs and specifications submitted to FCC and approved. This was before these units ever reached external testers.

 

 

In the Amico case it looks like they are doing some field market testing without anything in place for manufacturing and mass production.  So they wouldn't need certifications at this time. 

 

But as you've experienced, a typical scenario would be manufacturing pre-production; then a finalised unit can be sent out for regulatory certifications; then a small production run of units that can be sent out as samples for evaluations, and if everything is in order, mass production.

 

3 hours ago, MrBeefy said:

Well and to be fair, as long as you have been following along it basically has everything me and others have mentioned here. Except Smash doesn't cover how mr_me doesn't believe their engineer Gabe, when he said it failed FCC testing and they didn't retest it.

Here's a timeline their engineers described. They first got a prototype in a lab for testing in late 2020 and got a negative result; they implemented engineering changes in early 2021; got the revised prototype in the lab in summer 2021 where RF emissions testing showed it to be within fcc standards.  And he also indicated that they did not submit for certification at that time.  It's good they didn't, since it's so long ago they'd likely have to make changes and would have to re-certify anyway.

Edited June 19, 2023 by mr_me

[MattPilz]

2 hours ago, mr_me said:

In the Amico case it looks like they are doing some field market testing without anything in place for manufacturing and mass production.  So they wouldn't need certifications at this time. 

Whatever you argue, it is still not appropriate for them to include stickers with FCC branded logos in this manner. We can already see the misinformation potential of doing so, by those who have these field market units who have now publicly stated they are FCC cleared, which is a logical conclusion based on those unaccredited stickers, but false.

 

Quote

a typical scenario would be manufacturing pre-production

"Formal" production of Amico was stated to had begun in 2021, I read. It is also a misconception that an absolute finalized unit is needed for FCC testing (see below), but that should be irrelevant given Intellivision stated the hardware was 100% finalized by 2021 and reaffirmed this in 2022.

 

2 hours ago, mr_me said:

And he also indicated that they did not submit for certification at that time.  It's good they didn't, since it's so long ago they'd likely have to make changes and would have to re-certify anyway.

FCC has specific procedures in place known as Permissive Change to deal with a large range of hardware and software amendments after certification, with minimal to no additional testing required. Many products go through iterations after the initial FCC certification. The requirement for most classifications is to submit a cover letter along with any accompanying materials expressing the differences. You can find these notices and often multiple iterations for most game consoles including from Sony and Nintendo, and also including for their test units. I never heard or saw any indication that the Amico underwent any radical core hardware or RF-related changes that would had required them to submit a completely new recertification/application.

Edited June 19, 2023 by MattPilz

[Wayler]

@mr_me, You do realize that even ChatGPT admits when being wrong and apologizes when caught hallucinating.

 

You stated that the labels need to be there on a pre-production prototype while providing zero corroborating evidence for similar cases. And after shown documentation that fake FCC labels should not be there, your response is only "That may be true". Then what was your original statement? Where did it come from? Address that please. Provide some additional information from your databank of expert knowledge. However, if you cannot do that, an apology is a proper response for providing incorrect data. And please make an adjustment on your algorithm for future reference.

 

It is infuriating to talk to an entity that is unwilling to admit mistakes.

[roots.genoa]

I personally never make mistakes. It's other people that make the mistake of believing me, simple as that! 😎

[Pink]

8 hours ago, Cebus Capucinis said:

That makes sense when they haven't passed. But Amico is already passed. Some guy said so.

Yeah and if they hadn't passed yet then they would know that and wouldn't lie about it, obviously.🤪

Edited June 19, 2023 by Pink

[rayik]

 ... Never mind

Edited June 19, 2023 by rayik

[mr_me]

3 hours ago, Wayler said:

@mr_me, You do realize that even ChatGPT admits when being wrong and apologizes when caught hallucinating.

 

You stated that the labels need to be there on a pre-production prototype while providing zero corroborating evidence for similar cases. And after shown documentation that fake FCC labels should not be there, your response is only "That may be true". Then what was your original statement? Where did it come from? Address that please. Provide some additional information from your databank of expert knowledge. However, if you cannot do that, an apology is a proper response for providing incorrect data. And please make an adjustment on your algorithm for future reference.

 

It is infuriating to talk to an entity that is unwilling to admit mistakes.

It is my opinion that it doesn't violate fcc regulations because fcc regulations cover products in the market.  These prototypes are not products for sale, the Amico is not yet a product.  I'm not going to say I'm right and you're wrong, it's my opinion. If they want to show someone, whether a potential contract manufacturer or investor, what the final product looks like then those labels need to be there.  In some cases the logos are embossed in the plastic and part of the moulding.  They don't have to be there but then they aren't showing a complete prototype.  The zero fcc number indicates to me that certifications may not be complete.  I also suggested that certifications status should be part of the field market test program agreement.  And they should be clear whenever asked about certifications.

 

 

[jerseystyle]

1 hour ago, mr_me said:

It is my opinion that it doesn't violate fcc regulations because fcc regulations cover products in the market.  These prototypes are not products for sale, the Amico is not yet a product.  I'm not going to say I'm right and you're wrong, it's my opinion. If they want to show someone, whether a potential contract manufacturer or investor, what the final product looks like then those labels need to be there.  In some cases the logos are embossed in the plastic and part of the moulding.  They don't have to be there but then they aren't showing a complete prototype.  The zero fcc number indicates to me that certifications may not be complete.  I also suggested that certifications status should be part of the field market test program agreement.  And they should be clear whenever asked about certifications.

 

 

You’re wrong because the FCC itself says they can’t be there. I showed you the docs where they say this. You can’t put that logo on “just for pretendsies”, that’s not how this works. You keep acting like it is okay and/normal for them to do this and it isn’t. You are completely wrong here. 

[digdugnate]

2 hours ago, mr_me said:

It is my opinion that 

 

 

 

It is my opinion you are full of baloney.

[MrBeefy]

6 hours ago, MattPilz said:

Whatever you argue, it is still not appropriate for them to include stickers with FCC branded logos in this manner. We can already see the misinformation potential of doing so, by those who have these field market units who have now publicly stated they are FCC cleared, which is a logical conclusion based on those unaccredited stickers, but false.

 

"Formal" production of Amico was stated to had begun in 2021, I read. It is also a misconception that an absolute finalized unit is needed for FCC testing (see below), but that should be irrelevant given Intellivision stated the hardware was 100% finalized by 2021 and reaffirmed this in 2022.

 

FCC has specific procedures in place known as Permissive Change to deal with a large range of hardware and software amendments after certification, with minimal to no additional testing required. Many products go through iterations after the initial FCC certification. The requirement for most classifications is to submit a cover letter along with any accompanying materials expressing the differences. You can find these notices and often multiple iterations for most game consoles including from Sony and Nintendo, and also including for their test units. I never heard or saw any indication that the Amico underwent any radical core hardware or RF-related changes that would had required them to submit a completely new recertification/application.

4 hours ago, Pink said:

Yeah and if they hadn't passed yet then they would know that and wouldn't lie about it, obviously.🤪

I rewatched Mullis' opening to see if I could get a good look at the sticker. He looks at the back and says the numbers suggest it's a test unit (recognizes fake numbers) then later lies about having FCC certs. 🤣

 

Definitely moving goalposts, but that has been the only thing they've done. They actually gone backwards more than forward.

 

It is all going to be irrelevant anyways. Their stuff is going to go EOL. They had a horrible misunderstanding as to why the price of consoles drop over time.

 

They'd be better off asking China to pump out a small black android box without the lights LEDs and controllers and sell that. 

 

Maybe the shell molds can be re-purposed as a medical device for a podiatrist?

[MrBeefy]

11 minutes ago, digdugnate said:

 

It is my opinion you are full of baloney.

I like baloney! This doesn't smell like baloney.