Authentic makers sueing Cloners?
- Thread starter Kendogalopigus
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
I have never seen a bottle of Pepsi with the Coca Cola logo on it with 'Coca Cola style soda' on the label...
Here is an example of a medication.
Disclaimer: When referring to clones I am in no way shape or form discussing any identifying intellectual markings. I am merely discussing the 1:1 manufacturer of said product with no identifying marks, or artwork.
Funny choice, Asprin lost trademark status in the early 1900's because it became used as a Generic. Bayer is the brand name I was referring to and can be found in the little circle off to the right with a registered symbol next to the name. You have to click on the picture to see this.
Disclaimer: When referring to clones I am in no way shape or form discussing any identifying intellectual markings. I am merely discussing the 1:1 manufacturer of said product with no identifying marks, or artwork.
If it were aspirin related, there would be products that are marketed and sold as "Advil clone." There are plenty of makers of ibuprofen and Advil is one of them. But if comparing it to blatant examples of cloners in vaping market, then we or you would cite that example of ibuprofen vendor that sells products that are marketed as "Advil Clone" with the word clone right there in the name of their product.
With the Hammer mod example, the shape of the original appears distinct to me. I could likely specify the nuances that make it unique in about 5 or so paragraphs, but feel the picture makes it simple. The clone example of this covers about 95 to 99% of those nuances. It appears, and on one website I saw, intentionally made to copy that design. The markings on the side are ornamental artwork that aren't exactly trademark, or if they are, they aren't company logos (of fhe primary kind). I dunno, but am saying that these markings are more ornamental than distinguishing marks specific to that brand. They are specific to the device and original design. And they are part of what was copied in the clone to make it even more of a 1:1 copy. I believe the intent was to copy that design foremost and the quality of product function was secondary. Perhaps those more familiar with this device beg to differ, and perhaps they are more correct, in that I may be told that Hammer mod clones function very similar to the original while the design aspects are only 93% close in appearance.
ibuprofen here in my country has to be marked as that and prescribed as that. I never saw a brand name in my prescriptions. I bring the prescription to a pharmacy and thats when they make me choose which brand. In the case of Advil, as I am looking at it right now,, the word ibuprofen is bigger then the Advil logo.
As I said I am unaware of the legality behind marketing something as a XXX styled product. However, if the owner of the trademark has not filed and litigates, the point is moot as they are not embracing the purpose of a trademark or copyright. That being trademark and copyright laws are designed to "protect" intellectual work. Failure to assert/inform of the original owners right, may be grounds to consider this intellectual property public domain.
On the Hammer mod, yes all artwork if "original" is a trademark and should be litigated/protected against copy. As far as the design, it appears to be a re-purposed brass 90 degree hydraulic fitting which has been chromed, and possibly? machined. These are used in many industries, and they certainly have no right to claim it as an original design. A Cloner has the right to have new artwork in the place of the original and make it similar.
Seriously, why are we having this conversation? It seems pretty simple to me. You charge an extravagant premium for your product. You have a responsibility to defend/protect your product if it is WORTH that premium. It is pretty obvious that the vast majority of vapers are here for the utilitarian aspect, and not for the artwork/intellectual stimulation their mods provide. If you despise clones, let the authentic makers know you expect THEM to defend their "premium" product from clones. Dang where is the outrage over the single man that changed the modern world, and got screwed over in the process, Tesla? Vaping is about saving lives, not blowing clouds and being elitist. Cloud chasing would have never been invented if all of this clone crap was a part of e-cigs. Vaping would have died with this mentality, along with the millions it has most likely saved!
Disclaimer: When referring to clones I am in no way shape or form discussing any identifying intellectual markings. I am merely discussing the 1:1 manufacturer of said product with no identifying marks, or artwork.
IMO, filing for protection is a bit of a catch-22. I believe you would present decent argument as to why not, but also believe pro-clone faction will justify that the clone is necessary so that those who want to try it out can afford to do so. And thus far, I am yet to see an argument from pro-authentic side that suggests clones will stop. So, the authentic maker could pay the $10,000+ price tag to get protection and either eat that cost (as cost of doing business) or, more likely, pass it along to consumer with result of higher cost for their product. Making the clone maker's price point even easier to justify and having the non-deceived buyers support that clone product, based on price. I could also see a business going through process of getting protection, but because, one step out of say 50, was not done properly, then a whole bunch of pro-clone buyers saying, "too bad, their fault, they lose."
So, given the current playing field, it is either better to not get protection and hope for the best or join the clone side of production and say to heck with those who care to do things that are questionable to a certain buying segment.
And as I noted above, I don't see it as possible to cover every base for authentic maker, and likely not worth it given how the market currently operates. If it were strictly manufacturers that were the potential hurdle, then I think this issue would already be squarely addressed. Instead, it is a whole segment of buyers who will pounce on any original maker if anything is not done perfect. And even if done perfect, then it will be "you priced it too high, too bad for you as clone maker prices it at level that is affordable and identical to yours, so you lose."
Again, I am non-mod owner/user. My cigalike device functions well, IMO, 95% of the time. I believe strongly if I push this point further, a substantial amount of mod owners will suddenly become elitist and make mince meat out of my position, my decision to stick to cigalikes. So, from where I'm sitting, watching fellow vapers spend hundreds, of not thousands, on "newest cool looking device," it strikes me that vaping is about more than keeping it simple and sticking to the one device type that helped you realize you could quit smoking if you continued with this device.
I further see vaping as mostly about recreation and suitable alternative to smoking, but not necessarily intended as replacement. Perhaps that was Hon Lik's intention, but need not be all manufacturers' intention, nor how Judge Leon ruled in Soterra decision.
As I see it, some vapers (strikes me as majority) have made vaping a hobby in the sense of collecting lots of (awesome) gear and using it at various times, or not using it, as it is deemed that much of a collectible. If that hobby is threatened, THEN it goes to the default position of, "but vaping help saved my life."
I see clone makers capitalizing on the very obvious push by vaping purchasers to have copy of the latest cool gear, and who are okay with idea that the design was blatantly ripped off from another manufacturer/product designer.
Perhaps update this disclaimer to say, "I am in no way shape or form discussing any identifying intellectual markings, as long as the manufacturer is 100% correctly protected."
For it seems you are saying, if not, then tough tooties for the original maker.
just a little info.
i am looking at my bottle of ibuprofen purchased at Walgreens.
at the bottom of the label it reads"compare to Advils tm active ingredient"
i seem to recall it used to say"compare to Advil tm" at one time.
i am looking at my bottle of ibuprofen purchased at Walgreens.
at the bottom of the label it reads"compare to Advils tm active ingredient"
i seem to recall it used to say"compare to Advil tm" at one time.
Yup, and the KangerTech logo looks like Circle K gas and food.
Chinese don't care, our government does not care one bit. As far as this country goes until our elected fools stop being elected by bigger fools we will never have a trade agreement negotiated from strength or to our benefit, or an even field by any stretch.
People do love to whine and cry though.
Chinese don't care, our government does not care one bit. As far as this country goes until our elected fools stop being elected by bigger fools we will never have a trade agreement negotiated from strength or to our benefit, or an even field by any stretch.
People do love to whine and cry though.
Close only counts in horseshoes.
Here is how the system is suppose to work. All that is needed is for businesses to follow the rules if they want to protect their designs.
Winchester man charged with selling counterfeit vaporizers - News - The Winchester Star - Winchester, MA
Last edited:
And then to spend an inordinate amount of time playing Whack-A-Mole, 'cause as soon as one purveyor of infringing stuff gets whacked, another will pop up.
Bit late to the discussion I have jumped ship from another forum, I got a orginal erk...... and thinks it's the cheapest nastiest atty I have bought, terrible packaging feels so cheap, some say it vapes better but compared to the rose package it's terrible.
I haven't built it yet but not impressed no spares and like the Squape R another cash cow buying all the extras, man those Austrian are mean are they getting there revenge.
On another note the dragon is going to take over the vaping world in 2015 they have gone nuts Orchid V3.5 and V4! Taifun V2 ...! Etc who says my Chinese cousins cant improve on an original design! I still have a KFL fake I got over a year ago it already had the o ring in the top cap before SM did it on the KFL+V2 they launched in February this year who is cloning who?
I haven't built it yet but not impressed no spares and like the Squape R another cash cow buying all the extras, man those Austrian are mean are they getting there revenge.
On another note the dragon is going to take over the vaping world in 2015 they have gone nuts Orchid V3.5 and V4! Taifun V2 ...! Etc who says my Chinese cousins cant improve on an original design! I still have a KFL fake I got over a year ago it already had the o ring in the top cap before SM did it on the KFL+V2 they launched in February this year who is cloning who?
Last edited:
There is a recent thread where a high end atty maker has made a much less expensive version of their atty. posters are saying they are buying the fakes on Fastech. No matter what the original manufacturer charges, China will copy it and sell it for less, and people who only care about saving $5 will buy the fake. Blows away the argument that the original manufacturers should make less expensive versions...
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
