Well, Zbox95, some of the pieces look like v5 pieces because they are. Dayan+mf8's idea was to start with an odd cube and split (and enlarge) the middle layer using the 2x2 ball core. Their 4x4 is essentially a 3x3 with the middle layer split in two halves (and thus the centres in four). This 6x6 really looks like a V5 with all the pieces in the middle layers enlarged and split (compare with http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:V-Cube_5_disassembled.jpg). This also means that most of Verdes' ideas, including the crucial one of using conical surfaces to determine the shapes, and the wings to keep the pieces in place, are still used. On the other hand, there is this stroke of genius of this particular 2x2 core which is completely different from previous ball core mechanics (in the case of the 4x4) AND disposes with the hidden layer completely.
All of this raises a question: to infringe on a patent, you need just to infringe on some claims, not all of them. You are using other people's intellectual property even if you are using only part of it in a different type of project and/or improve on it. You do not need to copy it completely.
So, it is NOT a KO, because it is not a copy, there are original ideas and improvements (that's why Yujin's 11x11 is a KO: even though Verdes does not manufacture an 11x11 yet, it is based the drawings on Verdes' patent), BUT there are some disturbingly similar aspects. I mean disturbing because they may prompt Verdes to sue. I hope they reach an agreement and that this cube can be marketed everywhere.
There would be, I guess, a different way of designing a 6x6: start with, say, Udo Krell's or Eastsheen's design and split the middle layers. This would work, but my hunch is, not as nicely.
Roberto
All of this raises a question: to infringe on a patent, you need just to infringe on some claims, not all of them. You are using other people's intellectual property even if you are using only part of it in a different type of project and/or improve on it. You do not need to copy it completely.
So, it is NOT a KO, because it is not a copy, there are original ideas and improvements (that's why Yujin's 11x11 is a KO: even though Verdes does not manufacture an 11x11 yet, it is based the drawings on Verdes' patent), BUT there are some disturbingly similar aspects. I mean disturbing because they may prompt Verdes to sue. I hope they reach an agreement and that this cube can be marketed everywhere.
There would be, I guess, a different way of designing a 6x6: start with, say, Udo Krell's or Eastsheen's design and split the middle layers. This would work, but my hunch is, not as nicely.
Roberto
Last edited:
