ECITA warns electronic cigarette industry of looming patent infringement threat.
- Thread starter freakindahouse
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
-
- Tags
- revolution
- Status
If I'm not mistaken joyetech(and possibly DSE) purchased the proper patent rights from Ruyan over a year ago to allow them to "clone" their own version of the E-cig? I believe Ruyan even admitted to this in a press release. Can anyone comment on this, am I remembering this correctly???
I am yet to see a 'proper patent' (or parent!) for the ecigs we all use and love! The Ruyan patent I have seen (the only one I can find anywhere on the registers) is for an ultrasonic device, not a heating element atomiser.
So I'd be surprised, but I haven't checked out that side of it thoroughly.
Katherine
So I'd be surprised, but I haven't checked out that side of it thoroughly.
Katherine
Found on Wikipedia
Found on epo.org (took some time to track down where & how to search for patent documents). There were two documents that came up when searching for "1618803"
https://data.epo.org/publication-se... 1618803&iDocId=6557659&iPosition=0&iFormat=0
https://data.epo.org/publication-se... 1618803&iDocId=7026941&iPosition=1&iFormat=0
The product described utilizes some type of pump. I don't think it matches how the RN 4081 works....
U.S. Patent info: The Ruyan Patent Situation. | Ruyan E-Cigarette V8 Super Mini Electronic Cigarette V9 Nicotine Refill Flavors Cartridges China | E-Cigarette-Mart.com
As for an agreement between Joyetech & Ruyan, I did a search on the joyetech web site for "ruyan". Search result was null. I was unable to locate any news on an agreement between the two companies.
FYI, I've posted the fruits of my labours on this here: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...granted-us-patent-rights-4-e-cigarette-3.html
The old 4081 style NPRO is pretty much obsolete now. NJOY still has the same NPRO battery, but they came out with a cartomizer design (called the "NPRO 2N1") about 5 or 6 months ago:
This was the thread I was remembering from more than a year ago:
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/e-cigarette-news/33971-ruyan-tackles-copycats.html
I haven't re-perused through its entirety to see if it adds anything meaningful to the discussion.
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/e-cigarette-news/33971-ruyan-tackles-copycats.html
I haven't re-perused through its entirety to see if it adds anything meaningful to the discussion.
Dragonite site:
Dragonite International Limited
Another great source of info is HKEx (information on the Hong Kong stock exchange)
:: HKEx :: HKExnews ::
The stock code for Dragonite is 329. If you do a search for all documents over the last year or two, you'll find a lot of financial statements and reports (most of which made my eyes glaze over.) But there is also food for thought buried in there----and some of it's troubling.
Over the last few years, Runyan/Dragonite has been on the rocks financially because of: competition from cheaper knock offs (their perspective), regulatory hassles world wide, the global financial crisis, and internal mistakes/mismanagement (including a serious problem with one of their ecig models in Sept 2009 that led to mass returns and big losses)
Han Lik is still on the board of directors and a major share holder at Dragonite. Lik developed the ecig and started this revolutionso I can well imagine how frustrating it must be to see his company struggling while all these competitors make millions. On the other hand, some of those competitors have clearly improved on his original design (eg, the development of different types of atomizers and manual batteries of all kinds)
Lik deserves to reap the financial rewards for his invention. But does his company "own" the rights to all of these improvements? I guess that's the sort of thing that would be hashed out in court. Dragonite has successfully pursued legal action in the PRC (People's Republic of China) against 3 Chinese companies. But they're looking outside China now. And law suits are time consuming and expensive.
Here is where things get dicey. In April 2010, an unnamed third party "lender" provided Dragonite with a 1 year 34 million HKD (Hong Kong Dollar) loan. Who might that be? Doesnt say. But now Dragonite has the funds to stay afloat and, perhaps, to more aggressively pursue their "patent rights" internationally.
There is A LOT going on in the PV/smokeless world --to say the least. And now this little ripple--which might turn out to be a huge problem.
Ok, I found what I was looking for regarding patents under patent laws and I was right in my thinking that any improvements or changes to an original design can be patented as a new product. 
General Information Concerning Patents
General Information Concerning Patents
Last edited:
This is the only reference I could find on the Joyetech website:Ok, I found what I was looking for regarding patents under patent laws and I was right in my thinking that any improvements or changes to an original design can be patented as a new product.
All products of Joyetech are endowed with complete export certifications. We have applied relevant patents both domestic and abroad and obtained some patents till now.
Huh?
Does that mean they've applied for patents or they actually have a patent or some of both?
Mountain out of a molehill ffs !! 
IP legislation is one of the most delicate and complicated aspects of the law, from inception, implementation and more importantly, enforcement ..... which only covers 14, 17 or at best 20 years for redress anyway .....
Kicking up a ridiculous fuss over (what actually amounts to) nothing is extremely counter-productive and adds unnecessary concern at a time when Vaping has more than enough to worry about ......
Not only that, this bit of non-news just gives the Anti-Lobby another stone to throw at us, which they most certainly will do with great exaggeration .....
If ECITA actually knew what they were doing, they'd have "quietly" contacted all the Vendors and told them to roll that letter in to a ball and slam-dunk it in to the bin ..... instead we get a public and vastly premature commotion, created purely for the purpose of their own self-promotion
IP legislation is one of the most delicate and complicated aspects of the law, from inception, implementation and more importantly, enforcement ..... which only covers 14, 17 or at best 20 years for redress anyway .....
Kicking up a ridiculous fuss over (what actually amounts to) nothing is extremely counter-productive and adds unnecessary concern at a time when Vaping has more than enough to worry about ......
Not only that, this bit of non-news just gives the Anti-Lobby another stone to throw at us, which they most certainly will do with great exaggeration .....
If ECITA actually knew what they were doing, they'd have "quietly" contacted all the Vendors and told them to roll that letter in to a ball and slam-dunk it in to the bin ..... instead we get a public and vastly premature commotion, created purely for the purpose of their own self-promotion
- Apr 2, 2009
- 5,171
- 13,288
- 67
It appears that John Banzhaf is now routinely reading the ECF, as he issued the following press release on this very issue last week (and the ECF is the only place I've read about it).
E-Cigarettes Hit With Patent Infringement Threat // Effect Could Disrupt Industry Already Under Fire
E-Cigarettes Hit With Patent Infringement Threat // Effect Could Disrupt Industry Already Under Fire
Doesn't surprise me at all that he or one of his minions is on here routinely reading everything said on ECF. Same goes for the FDA as well. They are definitely staying on top of everything that we have to say, so we should never be surprised to find out they know what is going on and being said within the ECF forum.
- Status
Similar threads
