Could you clarify these issues for me?
- Thread starter Spence
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
1. Both. The Liquid, and the e-cig that delivers the Liquid.
2. Chinese don not honor rights. But they make the product. As for the patent, who knows? Joye-tech made the joye510, now every company over there makes it.
3.The Gestapo, er FDA does what it wants to do. The lower Court ruled against them and told them to stop seizing shipments from smoking anywhere & njoy, and they just appealed and got a stay from that order. They seize the shipments to protect "our" health. lol But in reality, they are in the pocket of big tobacco & Pharms. Both of which give them money and both of which are losing big money because the e-cig works.
2. Chinese don not honor rights. But they make the product. As for the patent, who knows? Joye-tech made the joye510, now every company over there makes it.
3.The Gestapo, er FDA does what it wants to do. The lower Court ruled against them and told them to stop seizing shipments from smoking anywhere & njoy, and they just appealed and got a stay from that order. They seize the shipments to protect "our" health. lol But in reality, they are in the pocket of big tobacco & Pharms. Both of which give them money and both of which are losing big money because the e-cig works.
Question: 2. Do the Chinese hold rights to the PV's or the e-liquid? One or both?
Answer: "2. Chinese do not honor rights. But they make the product. As for the patent, who knows? Joye-tech made the joye510, now every company over there makes it."
Thanks, Tampa2, for your response.
I read somewhere that cigarette makers in the US had developed a PV-of-sorts in the past. Do you know if they hold a US patent?
Answer: "2. Chinese do not honor rights. But they make the product. As for the patent, who knows? Joye-tech made the joye510, now every company over there makes it."
Thanks, Tampa2, for your response.
I read somewhere that cigarette makers in the US had developed a PV-of-sorts in the past. Do you know if they hold a US patent?
Most States seem to rely on the propaganda put out from the FDA regarding their bans. If FDA approved, then there would most likely have to be reconsideration. I have to wonder if tax loss from people replacing cigarettes with e-cigs plays a part in the thought process of some of these states. 
E-Cig patent info. From Wiki:
The electronic cigarette was first developed with a registered patent, in April 2003 by SBT Co. Ltd., a Beijing based company, which is now controlled by the Golden Dragon Group Ltd. In 2004, Ruyan took over the project to further develop the emerging technology. Ruyan officially absorbed SBT Co. Ltd. and their name was changed to SBT RUYAN Technology & Development Co., Ltd. Already in May 2004, Ruyan sold the first electronic cigarette in China. In its first 3 years of production, SBT RUYAN saw steady increases in sales, from $13 million HKD ($1.7 million USD) in 2004 to $136 million HKD ($17 million USD) in 2005, and $286 million HKD ($37 million USD) in 2006.
The patent:
espacenet — Bibliographic data
There are hundreds of patents world wide for electronic cigarettes, most of them are held by Chinese and German companies that have US associations. I'd imagine the FDA has put the kabosh on their plans of going public. One is Bel Air International in Nashville, TN. You can search worldwide patents here: espacenet — Advanced Search (I used cigarette and nicotine as keywords).
A few US patents with foreign origination show up. The original inventor in China (above) also has his patent filed here in the US (March 18, 2005) United States Patent Application: 0070267031
The earliest e-cig patent seems to be 1963 by Herbert Gilbert: New Invention of 1963: The Smokeless Non-Tobacco Cigarette | Electronic Cigarettes by Instead E-Cigarette
Also the other tobacco companies have made a few smokeless products. The Accord (by Philip Morris) is still out there under their patents. I'm sure we'll see more once the FDA mess is cleared up.
NOVA Online | Search for a Safe Cigarette | "Safer" Cigarettes: A History
I didn't find anything specific to e-liquid (but I didn't look that long). I'm sure that some of the additives are patented (weird stuff like vitamin/nicotine liquid, etc.) but these are probably foreign for the most part.
In the US, there are several interesting patents regarding nicotine products (a few for Tobacco Alkaloid gums, nicotine tablets with improved nicotine absorption and the like).
On the FDA: The Food and Drug Administration (aka Fraud and Death Administration) has classified electronic cigarettes as drug delivery device and subject to market approval prior to sale under the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA). In January 2010, this classification was overturned by a federal judge. An appeals court overruled this classification on March 2010. Despite this, a number of electronic cigarette companies have emerged online. However, it is unclear what actions the FDA will take to ensure that only compliant products are on the market.
E-Cig patent info. From Wiki:
The electronic cigarette was first developed with a registered patent, in April 2003 by SBT Co. Ltd., a Beijing based company, which is now controlled by the Golden Dragon Group Ltd. In 2004, Ruyan took over the project to further develop the emerging technology. Ruyan officially absorbed SBT Co. Ltd. and their name was changed to SBT RUYAN Technology & Development Co., Ltd. Already in May 2004, Ruyan sold the first electronic cigarette in China. In its first 3 years of production, SBT RUYAN saw steady increases in sales, from $13 million HKD ($1.7 million USD) in 2004 to $136 million HKD ($17 million USD) in 2005, and $286 million HKD ($37 million USD) in 2006.
The patent:
espacenet — Bibliographic data
There are hundreds of patents world wide for electronic cigarettes, most of them are held by Chinese and German companies that have US associations. I'd imagine the FDA has put the kabosh on their plans of going public. One is Bel Air International in Nashville, TN. You can search worldwide patents here: espacenet — Advanced Search (I used cigarette and nicotine as keywords).
A few US patents with foreign origination show up. The original inventor in China (above) also has his patent filed here in the US (March 18, 2005) United States Patent Application: 0070267031
The earliest e-cig patent seems to be 1963 by Herbert Gilbert: New Invention of 1963: The Smokeless Non-Tobacco Cigarette | Electronic Cigarettes by Instead E-Cigarette
Also the other tobacco companies have made a few smokeless products. The Accord (by Philip Morris) is still out there under their patents. I'm sure we'll see more once the FDA mess is cleared up.
NOVA Online | Search for a Safe Cigarette | "Safer" Cigarettes: A History
I didn't find anything specific to e-liquid (but I didn't look that long). I'm sure that some of the additives are patented (weird stuff like vitamin/nicotine liquid, etc.) but these are probably foreign for the most part.
In the US, there are several interesting patents regarding nicotine products (a few for Tobacco Alkaloid gums, nicotine tablets with improved nicotine absorption and the like).
On the FDA: The Food and Drug Administration (aka Fraud and Death Administration) has classified electronic cigarettes as drug delivery device and subject to market approval prior to sale under the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA). In January 2010, this classification was overturned by a federal judge. An appeals court overruled this classification on March 2010. Despite this, a number of electronic cigarette companies have emerged online. However, it is unclear what actions the FDA will take to ensure that only compliant products are on the market.
Hellen that is one of the most informative posts I have seen to date regarding legal rights. The yearly income numbers are interesting also. That is a HUUUGE jump from 2004 to 2005! For some reason it only doubled from 2005 to 2006. Still a nice increase though. Any idea on sales from 2007 through today?
Very Well done!
Very Well done!
Thanks Slick.
I don't think we're likely to find suppliers reporting sales any time soon *grin* YOU know why.
All I ever saw were numbers thrown out there, but no real backing as to where they came up with that figure. Tobacco Asia says that sales top well over one million units and Smoke51 claims "We are moving around 30,000 to 40,000 starter kits every month, and cartridge sales are around half a million units monthly.". Electric Dreams The E-Cigarette Challenge
Smoking Everywhere claims 600,000 units in a year in the US through 120 distributors.
I'm sure the sales for e-cigs have soared since 2006 when smoking bans started in the UK and US and people started looking for alternatives.
Pretty interesting stuff.
I don't think we're likely to find suppliers reporting sales any time soon *grin* YOU know why.
All I ever saw were numbers thrown out there, but no real backing as to where they came up with that figure. Tobacco Asia says that sales top well over one million units and Smoke51 claims "We are moving around 30,000 to 40,000 starter kits every month, and cartridge sales are around half a million units monthly.". Electric Dreams The E-Cigarette Challenge
Smoking Everywhere claims 600,000 units in a year in the US through 120 distributors.
I'm sure the sales for e-cigs have soared since 2006 when smoking bans started in the UK and US and people started looking for alternatives.
Pretty interesting stuff.
Thanks Hellen!
Has there been much discussion about a two-pronged alternative strategy in support of PV's? Specifically, one that presents PV's as a recreational activity with no tie to tobacco or nicotine?
While I realize that I am in the minority here, I do not use nicotine liquid and nothing about the use of my PV is tied to cigarettes except the unfortunate fact that it has been labeled an "e-cig".
I understand that Judge Leon ruled favorably about PV's as a smoking alternative ... and that is one line of argument.
However, would there not be some merit to the argument that a PV (in some incarnation), developed and marketed for use strictly with nicotine-free liquid, be another avenue for the community to pursue?
Has there been much discussion about a two-pronged alternative strategy in support of PV's? Specifically, one that presents PV's as a recreational activity with no tie to tobacco or nicotine?
While I realize that I am in the minority here, I do not use nicotine liquid and nothing about the use of my PV is tied to cigarettes except the unfortunate fact that it has been labeled an "e-cig".
I understand that Judge Leon ruled favorably about PV's as a smoking alternative ... and that is one line of argument.
However, would there not be some merit to the argument that a PV (in some incarnation), developed and marketed for use strictly with nicotine-free liquid, be another avenue for the community to pursue?
i think the actual device would be considered paraphernalia the same way as a ..... it doesn't matter if it can be used for legal substances. the fact that it was developed as a device for nicotine delivery makes it unlikely that it would be approved as a flavor or aroma delivery device.
No doubt that would be the battle ... developing a unique device that could be a recognized entity separate from the current "e-cig".
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
