Dayan vs. V-Cube Patent Infringement

._.

what evidence do you have that "By boycotting v-cube's products they'll understand that they are bringing nothing to the community but rather taking from it."?

also, what evidence do you have that, "Through legal action they will not get the message."?
 
Rpotts said:
._.

what evidence do you have that "By boycotting v-cube's products they'll understand that they are bringing nothing to the community but rather taking from it."?

also, what evidence do you have that, "Through legal action they will not get the message."?
Click to expand...
First part: Well are they really? V-cube hasn't released any new cubes lately, and has taken them off the market. The main reason we are boycotting v-cube is because of that, and I can ensure the message will travel.
Part 2: If you get sued, are you really gunna stop and say "Oh, I really am being stupid." or are you gunna be all like "Oh noes. I'm getting sued, these idiots." and be all defensive?
 
y3k9 said:
First part: Well are they really? V-cube hasn't released any new cubes lately, and has taken them off the market. The main reason we are boycotting v-cube is because of that, and I can ensure the message will travel.
Click to expand...

You plan on boycotting V-Cubes to try to send them a message to invest more money in releasing a new product? That seems horrible counter productive to me.
 
Not that I'm going to be defending V-cubes's actions here, but how do you know that they aren't helping the market? <hypothetical>What if, for example, they know that if the Guhong's saturate the market, people will not buy a V-3 which is marginally better, so they don't release it; vs removing the Guhong's from the market, then releasing a V-3 which is actually slightly better, and overall improves the state of speedcubing? And don't tell me that if it's better, EVERYONE will buy it. Not everyone will. Not everyone has the disposable income to buy anything and everything they've ever had an urge to have. They must know that the market is big enough for them to justify the cost of retooling a new production line of cubes. </hypothetical situation>
 
Also, the reaction of the speedcubing community really is over the top. V-cubes has no interest in "bettering the speedcubing community" unless it directly impacts their bottom line. They are a business, not a charity. Boycotting them does not improve the community, it only drives them out of business. Competition leads to innovation in a free market system.
 
But you can't really have competition if one company tries to get rid of any vaguely similar designs.

I think boycotting is a pretty silly move; a more direct approach will do better. I can't really see it positively affecting the community, unless we'd normally be buying a huge amount of V-Cubes around now (so the boycott would be a big deal). Thing is, the buying of V-Cubes has generally slowed down a lot in the community; people mostly buy them to sell/mod, if they don't have a good 5x5/6x6/7x7 yet, or if they do SO much cubing that their cubes wear out. Besides, I'm sure half of the people in this "boycott" will relent once they find out the reason for all this, if there is a good one.
 
Vincents said:
Not that I'm going to be defending V-cubes's actions here, but how do you know that they aren't helping the market? <hypothetical>What if, for example, they know that if the Guhong's saturate the market, people will not buy a V-3 which is marginally better, so they don't release it; vs removing the Guhong's from the market, then releasing a V-3 which is actually slightly better, and overall improves the state of speedcubing? And don't tell me that if it's better, EVERYONE will buy it. Not everyone will. Not everyone has the disposable income to buy anything and everything they've ever had an urge to have. They must know that the market is big enough for them to justify the cost of retooling a new production line of cubes. </hypothetical situation>
Click to expand...
Of course everyone wont buy it, but if it really is a better cube to the average cuber heaps of people will buy it. Even if Guhongs saturate the market (Perhaps they already have?) a new cube that is better will always prevail and be purchased by many.
 
Pantazis: You only mentioned once of these conical violations, and didn't even mention anything about the corners. You still never sent me the video link, nor did you post it on here (as per Stefan's request). You didn't provide me any pictures. Please stop making blatant lies, as I'm willing to show the PM's to the forum if you so choose. If you don't remember, in your first PM you mentioned how you didn't want me to display any bit of the PMs to the rest of the board, but if you're going to lie about it, I will.
 
Hey I dunno if this is relevant but I found this on a Spanish cubing forum:

Mefferts said:
I Already Mentioned Previously the Chinese juristic system has no provision for foreigners to sue small companies or identities, this Can Be Done by the China Patent holder legal if They Have strong internal connection Government Which Mr. Chan's company has. The Green V cube Patent (CHINA, 200480013109.3) Briefly Explains the theory just the Mechanism That Can Make 2x2 up to 11 x 11 cubes weitere Without Any diagrams or detail. A senior China Patent Office Official Told That Mr. Chan Patent application the V cube is Not Recognized as a patent in China as it Does Not Give Sufficient details, Henco They Accepted Mr. Chan's 777 cube application. And Mr. Chan's company is now the legal owner of the China Patent for the full V 2,2,2 to 11,11,11 cube cubes series in China and is the only one That has the legal right to sue if Other local factories They historical infringing patents. See the China Patent Office website below.
Click to expand...

I think it was in relation to the 7x7 KO.

Also, if anyone is interested in the US V-Cube Patent specifics:

This is an invention that concerns the construction of three-dimensional logic toys, which have the shape of a normal solid, substantially cubic in shape, and N number of layers in each direction of the three-dimensional rectangular Cartesian coordinate system, said layers consisting of smaller separate pieces. Their sides that form part of the solid's external surface are substantially cubic. The said pieces can rotate in layers around the three-dimensional axes of the coordinates; their visible rectangular surfaces can be colored or they can bare shapes, letters or numbers. The construction is based on the configuration of the internal surfaces of the separate pieces using planar, spherical and mainly right conical surfaces, coaxial to the semi-axis of the coordinates, the number of which is .kappa. per semi-axis. The advantage of this construction is that by the use of these .kappa. conical surfaces per semi-axis, two solids arise each time; the first has an even (N=2.kappa.) number of layers per direction visible to the user, whereas the second has the next odd (N=2.kappa.+1) number of visible layers per direction. As a result, by using a unified method and way of construction, for the values of .kappa. from 1 to 5, we can produce in total eleven logic toys whose shape is a normal geometric solid, substantially cubic in shape. These solids are the Cubic Logic Toys No N, where N can take values from N=2 to N=11. The invention became possible after we have solved the problem of connecting the corner piece with the interior of the cube, so that it can be self-contained, can rotate unobstructed around the axes of the three-dimensional rectangular Cartesian coordinate system and, at the same time, can be protected from being dismantled. This invention is unified and its advantage is that, with a new different internal configuration, we can construct--apart from the already known cubes 2.times.2.times.2, 3.times.3.times.3, 4.times.4.times.4, 5.times.5.times.5 which have already been constructed in many different ways and by different people--the next cubes from N=6 up to N=11. Finally, the most important advantage is that it eliminates the operational disadvantages that the already existing cubes have, except for the Rubik cube, i.e. 3.times.3.times.3.
Click to expand...
 
fatboyxpc said:
Pantazis: You only mentioned once of these conical violations, and didn't even mention anything about the corners. You still never sent me the video link, nor did you post it on here (as per Stefan's request). You didn't provide me any pictures. Please stop making blatant lies, as I'm willing to show the PM's to the forum if you so choose. If you don't remember, in your first PM you mentioned how you didn't want me to display any bit of the PMs to the rest of the board, but if you're going to lie about it, I will.
Click to expand...

There is only one video at the beginning of this thread, and there is
a comparison of the pieces for which I am refering my opinion. If you
still cannot realise this, do not blame me. Blame yourself.

And pictures? It is amazing you still asking them after all this ordeal.

Moreover, I am not the one who is lying here, you are the one, as you do not
understand anything from everything I had explained at least thrice (why?).
But I will say it again (fourth time):

1.The reason I did not want to say anything in public was because no one
(including you) could not understand I had nothing to do with the action.
Public frustration on the (unrelated to me) action was leaning towards me
because of that misunderstanding. Frustration is a bad guide for people.
At the same time, it is understandable that people were angry because some
of the best speedsolving cubes (KO or not, this is to be proved) were halted.

2. I knew very little of the case, and the danger of trying to share anything
(even little - especially in public with some lingering anger) seemed to be a bad idea.
As I said, *my* mistake was to try to share. I won't do this ever again.

3. Based on the video posted in the beginning of this thread there was a
comparison between two pieces for which I gave my own opinion. Look at
those pieces and look at my OPINION, and then your mind may finally be able
to combine the thought, realise what is going on, and leave me in peace.

If you can still do no grasp what I said, I really give up.

Finally, threatening me(?) LOL to show my PM in public, will neither harm me,
nor add anything new to the case (if you cannot comprehend, do not blame me).
It will just prove (once again) that *your* ethics and respect are non-existent
and people should never trust you.

As I said, read the above. You have been in denial for way to long compared to others.

And even if you *still* don't get it, I am CLEARLY telling you that I have *nothing* more
to add, especially to you. So your attacks to me won't have any extra results other than
add more rubbish to this thread and prolong an already dead case (about my *opinion*).


Pantazis
 
Last edited:
Sin-H said:
Probably true (including me :P) I know it's premature and not the best option, but a lot of people obviously think it might help.
Click to expand...

Not so much that it will help, as people are just mad that they can't buy their GuHongs, and there really isn't anything else they can do about it other than boycott
 
kastellorizo said:
And even if you *still* don't get it, I am CLEARLY telling you that I have *nothing* more to add, especially to you.
Click to expand...

46qVj.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

pjk
Unveiling of the most anticipated V-CUBE 3
11 12 13
Replies
249
Views
45,970
Michael Womack
Michael Womack
sq-1solver
  • Locked
Dayan GuHong and LingYun infringe the V-Cube 3 Patent?
Replies
6
Views
2,382
masterofthebass
masterofthebass
T
Selling old and rare experimental cubes from Chris Tran
Replies
1
Views
438
Tatertots
T
Michael Wimberly
[Review] Reviewing some new cubes! QiYi Warrior M 5x5, QiYi M Pro 4x4 v2, and DaYan Guhong Pro+ (54mm Maglev)
Replies
17
Views
3,956
Michael Wimberly
Michael Wimberly
lawofthecube
(SOLD) 2-MoYu WeiLong WRM V9 3x3 (Ball-Core UV) cubes and (3) Dayan GuHong Pro M cubes - Almost New, Month Old...
2
Replies
21
Views
3,632
lawofthecube
lawofthecube
Back
Top