The costs of running this huge site are paid for by ads. Please consider registering and becoming a Supporting Member for an ad-free experience. Thanks, ECF team.

stock up ?

Discussion in 'Eastmall-ecigarette' started by dskarpus, Jan 13, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Image has been removed.
URL has been removed.
Email address has been removed.
Media has been removed.
  1. dskarpus

    dskarpus Super Member ECF Veteran

    South China Morning Post
    January 12, 2011

    Patent owner to sue in US over e-cigarette rights
    Dennis Eng

    Hong Kong-listed patent owner Dragonite International is hoping to secure its hold on the estimated US$500 million global market for electronic cigarettes by suing potential infringers in the United States. Dragonite International, formerly Ruyan Group (Holdings), intends to take legal action against all the major e-cigarette manufacturers and distributors in the US.

    The company has won a number of patent infringement cases on the mainland, but a victory in US courts for Dragonite International would probably bolster its claim on the burgeoning e-cigarette market.

    The smokeless e-cigarettes are battery-powered devices that vaporise a liquid nicotine solution. They work by emitting a puff, or fine mist of nicotine, which is inhaled by the user. They are mostly made on the mainland.

    Legal action by Dragonite, which is expected to begin in Los Angeles tomorrow, would probably serve as a litmus test for the protection of patents based on Chinese innovations.

    "The lack of protection of intellectual property rights in China has permitted a deluge of illicit and poorly manufactured Chinese-made e-cigarettes to export markets," Dragonite International executive director Angela Ching said. "The confusion [over] the safety of these products has delayed the development of this otherwise breakthrough, which holds the potential to reduce global smoking-related health costs by hundreds of billions of US dollars."

    Even if Dragonite wins the suit and stops copyright-infringing rivals from doing business, it wouldn't be able to bring its product to the US market without approval from the US Food and Drug Administration. The FDA has classified e-cigarettes not as regular cigarettes and other tobacco products, but as unapproved smoke-cessation "drug delivery devices". As pharmaceutical products, e-cigarettes would have had to undergo years of clinical trials and extensive testing, something e-cigarette companies have argued against.

    In March 2009, the FDA imposed a formal import ban on the products. But 10 months later, federal Judge Richard Leon ruled that the FDA could only regulate the products and not ban them. The ruling was upheld by the District of Columbia Court of Appeals, which said e-cigarettes should be considered tobacco products, and that the FDA couldn't regulate them as drugs or devices if they weren't marketed as therapeutic. Even if the FDA agrees to regulate e-cigarettes as tobacco products, they must still be licensed and taxed.

    The FDA may also need to establish new inspection processes as the manufacturing of e-cigarettes differs from that of traditional cigarettes. In Hong Kong, the Department of Health declared the devices illegal in 2009, viewing any product containing nicotine as a pharmaceutical product that needs to be registered.


    The company's patent application for the "electronic atomisation cigarette" was recently approved by the US Patent and Trademark Office and covers all the main components, including the battery, vaporisation mechanism, activation switch and flavour cartridge. Hon Lik, who co-founded the company, is stated as the "first named inventor" of the e-cigarette on the approved patent application. The patent has already been granted in the European Union, Russia, the mainland, Malaysia, Taiwan, India, Mexico, Singapore, Israel and other major countries.
     
  2. trying

    trying Senior Member ECF Veteran

    Jun 11, 2010
    usa
    This is a very big development and needs to be posted in the news section.
     
  3. dskarpus

    dskarpus Super Member ECF Veteran

  4. Di

    Di ECF Guru ECF Veteran

    Oct 30, 2008
    *Australia*
    Oh My Goodness,

    Please keep us informed DSK,
    this type of development is of interest to us all -------

    and may have profound repercussions for us all.
     
  5. mwa102464

    mwa102464 Resting In Peace ECF Veteran

    I dont think he will win here in the states, the FDA will uphold this here
     
  6. dskarpus

    dskarpus Super Member ECF Veteran

    Hon Lik (Dragonite, nee Ruyan) has an approved US patent. The FDA is meaningless in this regard. For some insight into what may happen, look up George B. Selden, the original monopoly patent holder on the automobile engine, before Henry Ford.
     
  7. hiram13pm

    hiram13pm Super Member ECF Veteran

    May 4, 2010
    Merced, CA
    I just ordered a years worth of LR cartos.... I think I might just go ahead and order 5 or 10 more....

    Anyone know what the shelf-life of an empty carto is?
     
  8. dskarpus

    dskarpus Super Member ECF Veteran

    01-14-2011

    Source:. Infocast News

    Dragonite International has initiated a civil action for infringement of its 410 Patent against several US companies. The 410 Patent is the first US utility patent issued in the name of Hon Lik, who is an executive director of the company, and is recognized as the inventor of the electronic cigarette.

    The company is confident that it will prevail in this litigation and its patent portfolio will provide broad patent coverage over the electronic cigarettes as more patents are granted from the core patent applications.

    US Companies involved in the alleged infringement are Smoking Everywhere Inc., Instead, LLC and BLEC, LLC.
     
  9. Di

    Di ECF Guru ECF Veteran

    Oct 30, 2008
    *Australia*
    The shelf life of empty cartoz and unused attys is long for sure.

    Keep them in a sealed baggie, I have ones here that are over 2 years old,
    they are still good as gold,
    some of my original DPV9 cartoz, (KR808D) are 26months old now,
    they smoke - oooops -- sorry DSK - hahaha * Vape * great.
    and I have 801 attys and 510 attys from 20 months ago, they are still great also,

    so I think if they are new and unused, they are good for a long time, - 2 years at least --

    and I also have juice here that I am using with excellent results,
    that is now over 2 years old since I bought it,
    I dont know how old it was before I bought it--------
    Juice must be kept in a cool dry place and keep it sealed tight.

    I Keep my juice in a sealed bottle, in a drawer in my spare room, always dark in there !!!!!
    when I open a large bottle, I decant it into 30mls bottles and seal them
    and then store them in the drawer also, only taking out one bottle at a time as needed.

    I keep all my mixing stuff in there as well,
    all my Loranns flavas, and my mixer PG and VG
    I open and mix about 100 mls at a time, into 30 mls bottles, and reseal the large containers,
    my original Lorans 4ounce bottles are over 6 months now and still very good and strong in flava,
    and my original bottle of 36 VG mixer is 1 year old now, and almost finished, but still good and strong.

    so yes, you can stock up really well, and have no fear of loss of potency -------
     
  10. Di

    Di ECF Guru ECF Veteran

    Oct 30, 2008
    *Australia*
    soooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo,
    what do you think

    this patent case will only go after the smoking everywhere ans like that guys,

    not the ecig resellers like ones here on ecf>?????????

    I am very interested in this subject --------

    it says in your paper report,
    several European countries and some others have upheld the patent cause,
    does this mean that these countries will ban the selling of ecigs by any other than the original patent holders, ** Ruyan ** et al -- ??????


    any patent lawyers out there ??????????
     
  11. mudmanc4

    mudmanc4 Ultra Member Verified Member ECF Veteran

    Sep 22, 2009
    In The Plex
    So here we are again , but with another item , the ecig :facepalm:

    It never fails to make me laugh when someone tries to say someone else cannot make a product because they made it first. What a joke.

    Go ahead an waste your funds and others , you'll get no where fast , or slow , matters not. Just keep entertaining the rest of us . Please

    Just another ridiculous scare tactic to get people to stock up on something thats already so available at this point that it would be nearly impossible to get rid of. Not only that , there is at least one for certain atomizer manufacturer in the US right now thats already got there patent. So sue away.
     
  12. the.vapyre

    the.vapyre Senior Member Verified Member ECF Veteran

    Jul 19, 2010
    Houston, Texas
    US patent holders have plenty of opportunity to sue for Chinese infringement. It is rampant over there.
     
  13. dskarpus

    dskarpus Super Member ECF Veteran

    The New York State Assembly Health Committee voted to ban sales of Electronic Cigarettes to children and adults. E-cigs have proven to be a healthy alternative to cigarettes, much more successful than gums, patches, drugs, hypnosis, accupuncture etc. The Health Committee believes tobacco cigarettes with its attendant health dangers and taxes are better. Ignorance or lobbying are more important to the Assembly than the health of New Yorkers. I quit smoking 3 packs a day of cigarettes for forty years eighteen months ago with e-cigs. The Health Committee is is living in Bizarro world. The bill now goes to the full New York State Assembly.
     
  14. trying

    trying Senior Member ECF Veteran

    Jun 11, 2010
    usa
    Sort of related, Ruyan America has 2 new patents pending
    and they appear to be what the market is asking for.

    Thread in News section - "Unusual new Ruyan patents"
     
  15. Razorclaw

    Razorclaw Full Member

    Feb 20, 2011
    Canada
    Depending on who you ask, that Chinese guy that's now suing didn't even create the e-cigarette. He merely copy the idea and was the first to patent it in China. Google credited the creator as being a Japanese inventor while others say a nameless Canadian Chinese electronics worker came up with the original design while soldering. Either way, the lawsuit is a farce.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice