Evolv sues Joyetech over VW technology !
- Thread starter Mazinny
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Yes, Mike Buzzetti, former maker of the Buzz Pro Patent US20110097060 - Variable Voltage Portable Vaporizer
I haven't read the entire thread but these parts of the suit seem to legitimize Evolv's case in my opinion:
49. On or about November 17, 2015, Evolv’s President e-mailed Mr. Qian, providing him with a copy of the ’330 Patent, and offering to further discuss Joyetech and Wismec’s planned “low budget” 200-wattage device. Mr. Qian replied that he had forwarded the ’330 Patent to “our IP department” for review. 50. Evolv’s President reiterated that Joyetech and Wismec must obtain a license of the ’330 Patent to avoid infringement. Evolv offered to negotiate such a license in order to mitigate the harm that would result from a flood of Joyetech and Wismec’s pirated products being imported into the United States, as at the time the license was offered, Defendants had to date only produced low quality products. 51. Joyetech and Wismec refused to negotiate any license, instead making a pro forma denial of infringement, but refusing to explain why when asked. Again, without providing any explanation, Mr. Qian made an oblique reference to a “2008 publication,” but did not identify it. Defendants did not back away from their intended plan to sell copied circuit boards, and to incorporate them into infringing vaporizers, for importation, sale and re-sale within the United States.
And then further in the suit (page 19) it appears Joy Tech admits to stealing the technology:
86. Additionally, after saturating the United States market with knock-offs for almost four months, Defendants, and each of them, finally conceded after prodding, that a license to avoid infringement was necessary. Defendants’ Mr. Qian wrote in a March 7, 2016 e-mail, “[w]e have fully studied your patent with 22 [sic] claimed rights. How much do you need us pay for each licensed products…?” 87. Evolv replied as follows in relevant part, “Evolv is not willing to sell or license its patent. We are willing to continue to sell Wismec and Joyetech our boards, and to work with you to fulfill all of your needs [i.e., sell Evolv’s circuit boards in sufficient quantities].
49. On or about November 17, 2015, Evolv’s President e-mailed Mr. Qian, providing him with a copy of the ’330 Patent, and offering to further discuss Joyetech and Wismec’s planned “low budget” 200-wattage device. Mr. Qian replied that he had forwarded the ’330 Patent to “our IP department” for review. 50. Evolv’s President reiterated that Joyetech and Wismec must obtain a license of the ’330 Patent to avoid infringement. Evolv offered to negotiate such a license in order to mitigate the harm that would result from a flood of Joyetech and Wismec’s pirated products being imported into the United States, as at the time the license was offered, Defendants had to date only produced low quality products. 51. Joyetech and Wismec refused to negotiate any license, instead making a pro forma denial of infringement, but refusing to explain why when asked. Again, without providing any explanation, Mr. Qian made an oblique reference to a “2008 publication,” but did not identify it. Defendants did not back away from their intended plan to sell copied circuit boards, and to incorporate them into infringing vaporizers, for importation, sale and re-sale within the United States.
And then further in the suit (page 19) it appears Joy Tech admits to stealing the technology:
86. Additionally, after saturating the United States market with knock-offs for almost four months, Defendants, and each of them, finally conceded after prodding, that a license to avoid infringement was necessary. Defendants’ Mr. Qian wrote in a March 7, 2016 e-mail, “[w]e have fully studied your patent with 22 [sic] claimed rights. How much do you need us pay for each licensed products…?” 87. Evolv replied as follows in relevant part, “Evolv is not willing to sell or license its patent. We are willing to continue to sell Wismec and Joyetech our boards, and to work with you to fulfill all of your needs [i.e., sell Evolv’s circuit boards in sufficient quantities].
I read all 24 pages as well & while not a lawyer it seems pretty apparent to me that Joytech admitted fault & knowingly infringed on the patent. Seems about as clear as a legal document can be to me at least. It's too bad those who are defending Joytech & accusing Evolv of patent trolling as well as potentially suing everyone else in the industry haven't done the same before commenting.
This is a business deal gone bad, not a patent troll or threat of monopolizing the vaping industry as we know it. Evolv holds the patent, it's explicitly explained for exactly what the patent is, they chose to go after a competitor who they feel disregarded their patent rights. Simple business reason & decision IMO.
I agree, but on the same token we have only heard Evolv's side. I would be interested in reading Joy Tech's filing as well.
That old saying - There's two sides to every story - is probably in play here. Right now we are only reading what Evolv wants us to read. I'm sure Joy Tech has their version of events that likely contradict Evolv.
Considering China has a long and illustrious record of ignoring patents and trademarks, I'm not sure "We can make it cheaper!" is a valid defense. 
Considering China has a long and illustrious record of ignoring patents and trademarks, I'm not sure "We can make it cheaper!" is a valid defense.
And this could very well be the case.
Steal an idea make $50 million off of it.
Pay $10 million in fines.
Profit $40 million.
Considering China has a long and illustrious record of ignoring patents and trademarks, I'm not sure "We can make it cheaper!" is a valid defense.
Exactly, we deal with this frequently in the automotive aftermarket (parts business) & at times it's a matter of personal/vehicle safety. The Chinese never respond (typically) & continue to churn out shoddy parts for unsuspecting buyer's. They typically change the name or location of the factory & continue to sell as long as there is a potential market. I've seen some items from these factories & I can tell you that you wouldn't want to use them on your own vehicle but people buy them every day.
And here we have a huge issue with how patents and trademarks work. For the big companies, it's no issue to sue for trademark and patent infringement. However, for a small company, getting a patent or trademark issued is not a trivial expense. And getting that patent and trademark enforced is an even bigger expense. I'm sure there are a lot of huge companies that look at patent infringement fines as an acceptable method of doing business. And worse yet, if a small company should lose a court case in attempting to get their patents or trademarks enforced, it could very well be the end of that company.
And not to be misunderstood, most of the items in today's vehicles are made in Asia & there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. There is excellent manufacturing all over the world, it's more important how the mfr stands behind their product & the quality they produce than the location. I believe in global manufacturing because quite frankly it's quality at the end of the day that matters.
Back to my point about Joytech, they are not producing quality but quantity, you can do both but (IMO) they choose not too.
Back to my point about Joytech, they are not producing quality but quantity, you can do both but (IMO) they choose not too.
Yesssss most definitely more than once. And I can say it til my head explodes which may or may not happen.
To be told to give it a rest pleaseeee ... Not everyone has had a pleasant experience with said co & that's ok. I'm not telling anyone whose had a good experience to give it a rest!
Sent from my i6S+
I agree. I, too, had a very similar experience and no longer support the same company. And haven't kept a tally of everyone who has posted.
My memory is like swiss cheese these days
I wouldn't notice how many times people have posted if my life depended on it.
My wife started referring to her brain as swiss cheese a few years ago. Hope that concept isn't patented!
There is a Link to the ECF Thread where the Announcement was made in the Quote below.
If you take away the Moral and Ethical Issues of stepping on someone else's work, and view it from a Balance Sheet perspective, sometimes Businesses see Infringement as a More Profitable way to run a Company.
And that is kinda the Problem. Isn't it?
I think this Litigation is being driven by More than just Whether or Not someone hold a US Patent. And issues like "Chip Dumping", Predatory Pricing, and possibly even some Personal Dislikes may be at play.
I have noticed others have had concerns why Evolv is only going after Joytech.
It may not be Joytech USA that's in the cross hairs. What happens if Evolv wins.
Will Joytech China be enjoined as a party to the agreement as they are the parent company?
If so this could have far reaching implications.
Regards
Mike
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
