Authentic makers sueing Cloners?

[Ed_C]

OK, so the builder can't patent his/her mod because it not unique. So what can he/she do? They could trademark their name and logo. So what does China do? They make Stingray clones that say Manta-ray on the side instead of Stingray. Does anyone think that the original builder could trademark the shape of the mod? Maybe, it's my understanding that Coke owns the rights to the color Coke Red, but I doubt any builder would go that far. It's not really any different than after-market parts or any other product that looks like another, other than the name on the side. I would prefer for the name of the original builder to not be on the side, but I can't do anything to stop it and neither can any of you.

 

[dr g]

OK, so the builder can't patent his/her mod because it not unique. So what can he/she do? They could trademark their name and logo. So what does China do? They make Stingray clones that say Manta-ray on the side instead of Stingray. Does anyone think that the original builder could trademark the shape of the mod? Maybe, it's my understanding that Coke owns the rights to the color Coke Red, but I doubt any builder would go that far. It's not really any different than after-market parts or any other product that looks like another, other than the name on the side. I would prefer for the name of the original builder to not be on the side, but I can't do anything to stop it and neither can any of you.

Trade dress - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

For example, coke owns the rights to the shape of the coke bottle.

 

[TheProphet]

Trade dress - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

For example, coke owns the rights to the shape of the coke bottle.

For another example, Glock has a trademark on the outline of their pistols. This has made an issue lately with other firearms that even come close to resembling a Glock, or even airsoft replicas of Glock pistols. They have really been cracking down and throwing a hissy fit about that lately.

 

[Ed_C]

I wonder which mods are distinctive enough to qualify. Maybe a Poldiac

 

[faile]

I wonder which mods are distinctive enough to qualify. Maybe a Poldiac

(Bear in mind I know very little about mechs... )

Would the Hammer Mod qualify?

 

[Midniteoyl]

Or the Flip...

 

[dr g]

I wonder which mods are distinctive enough to qualify. Maybe a Poldiac

Just about all of them, from something as simple as a king mod to something as offbeat as an AR mod. The thing is if they are side by side is it obvious one is a copy of the other and the answer in most cases is yes.

 

[Ed_C]

Seems like something like the King might be hard sell, as each new model was quite a bit different than the previous model and they look a bit like a Chi You.

 

[dr g]

Seems like something like the King might be hard sell, as each new model was quite a bit different than the previous model and they look a bit like a Chi You.

Model to model doesn't matter. The plaintiff could probably use the hex nut model. The Chi you would be irrelevant as they are not the plaintiff, nor are they trademarked in the US. It's worth noting that listing the mod as a king mod clone is illegal in the US, and having it sold as such in China helps make the case.

In the end just about every justification anyone makes for clones falls flat, because it's 100% true that clones intend to capitalize on the design and brand of the original. They are literally what the trademark laws are intended to prevent.

 

[Maurice Pudlo]

I wonder which mods are distinctive enough to qualify. Maybe a Poldiac

Unless you can honestly say to us that you can't identify a Caravela from a Nemesis from a SMPL from a XXIX I think it would be a moot point for anyone to attempt to help you figure out what is distinctive enough to qualify for a patent.

Details matter, the devil is always in the details, that in and of itself should suffice to answer your question.

Maurice

 

[Ed_C]

How can model to model not matter if you're making a case for trade dress. If you have a model that doesn't look like the one you registered other than the fact that it's a 22mm tube, I don't see it. Coke can't make a new bottle shape and claim it under the old design.

 

[Ed_C]

Unless you can honestly say to us that you can't identify a Caravela from a Nemesis from a SMPL from a XXIX I think it would be a moot point for anyone to attempt to help you figure out what is distinctive enough to qualify for a patent.

Details matter, the devil is always in the details, that in and of itself should suffice to answer your question.

Maurice

Thank you for the snarky and unhelpful reply. It's always nice to have thoughtful input.I believe trade dress is more closely related to trademarks and not patents.

 

[Maurice Pudlo]

How can model to model not matter if you're making a case for trade dress. If you have a model that doesn't look like the one you registered other than the fact that it's a 22mm tube, I don't see it. Coke can't make a new bottle shape and claim it under the old design.

I may be wrong but glass bottles and plastic bottles are the same shape and thus covered under the same protection laws. The shape is recognized the world over.

I would think mods such as the virtus cv1 would certainly qualify as unique simply by its shape.

Maurice

 

[Ed_C]

I may be wrong but glass bottles and plastic bottles are the same shape and thus covered under the same protection laws. The shape is recognized the world over.

I would think mods such as the virtus cv1 would certainly qualify as unique simply by its shape.

Maurice

I would imagine that would be true. My point with the KIng was that each new model had a different shape,

 

[Ed_C]

I thought I remembered something with Apple and Samsung. There was a trade dress case based largely on the iPhone being a black rectangular with rounded corners, so I guess anything is possible,
Trade Dress Infringements - Team 4 - Deliverable 4 Portal

 

[Circa Survivor]

My comment was not directed at you specifically, and I'm not sure how you got that impression. But to answer your questions..

Yes, you are absolutely right. I am a part of the problem. But at least I admit it. I admit that I bought my clones because they were cheap, looked cool, worked well, and had the markings of the ones that I could not afford. I never tried to pass one of as something other than a clone if asked, but that is beside the point. But then things started to change in the industry. There has been a flood of reasonably priced authentic mods and atties that have come out in the last few months. While I'm not willing to spend $500 on a mech mod, I'm certianly willing to spend a little more than I would have on a clone, and have a little bit cleaner of a conscience. That was MY decision, for ME. I own it, just as i won my past decisions.

As for your last sentence... nobody has to do anything. There are alternatives to clones. Plenty of them. People buy them for a reason, and it's not because there aren't any alternatives.

Everybody who bought clones in this thread admitted it. I'm proud to buy clones. Why would I ever try to pass it off as a real one? Who am I gonna walk up to and ramble on about an atomizer? I'm not in it for the name, I'm in it for the functionality of the device, which the clones have functioned exactly like they should.

 

[Maurice Pudlo]

I would imagine that would be true. My point with the KIng was that each new model had a different shape,

Not likely going to be a trade dress issue if there is no continuity in the design across the brand.

Same with tube mods that are similar in profile, the general shape is not a defining brand characteristic.

There are and have been some mods that distinguished themselves by their shape, now if that shape were also used to define the brand you would have a trade dress case.

I don't know if the mod market is there quite yet. Another 10 years down the road, sure. 2 or 3 if BT gets into the fray, you bet.

Maurice

 

[dhaiken]

This. Especially when we'ere buying $120 attys from some guy named "Fatty" or some guy who goes by some stupid username. Look at Provape. They did it right. I don't see any Provari clones anywhere.

I believe the Provari was cloned. Very short lived fanfare.
Didn't garner as much attention as a popcorn fart in a Tornado.
Why? Provari did it right!
Lesson to the others?
If you can't run with the big dogs, don't get off the porch.

 

[edyle]

Umm.... now you're just pulling stuff out your rear end.




Seriously? Alright, I'm out of this thread. I'm gonna go shop for some clones.

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yesl

the repetitive clone wars debate is really just a religion debate, not a manufacturing debate, and even less a vape matter.

 

[Maurice Pudlo]

Everybody who bought clones in this thread admitted it. I'm proud to buy clones. Why would I ever try to pass it off as a real one? Who am I gonna walk up to and ramble on about an atomizer? I'm not in it for the name, I'm in it for the functionality of the device, which the clones have functioned exactly like they should.

Of course they have similar functionality, same as a stolen dollar has the same functionality as an earned dollar.

However in much the same way a clone will not return on your investment in the future, a stolen pile of cash that needs laundering is going to net you a fraction of its original value.

If ever my desire to vape ends, I will have amassed a volume of authentic devices that for all intence and purposes will not decrease in value much, and in some cases may actually increase in value. At which point the savings you made on your clones is negated.

Maurice