Mefferts 7x7 and Holey Cube!!!

Also, my company has the option to continuously develop this software
Click to expand...
Only if you cover your initial 1M currency units. Just like in my example the medicine-industry can only keep making medicine if they can cover their research-and-development-costs.
I think V-Cubes will have a very hard time surviving and will not be able to cover R&D for future products
 
Ethan Rosen said:
earlier today the inventor of the void cube, the master pyraminx, the floppy cube, and many others has said that based on that mefferts email, he is immediately ceasing plans to mass produce puzzles such as the master pyraminx and the pyracue, which are both puzzles he has been talking with Meffert about producing.
Click to expand...
*** you, China.

ExoCorsair said:
My pricing, as long as it is significantly greater than 1 unit is irrelevant.
...
Does this mean I stop producing software? No, because there will always be people that legitimately purchase this software (such as, individuals, schools, government, other companies).
Click to expand...
I see you've already realized why your analogy doesn't work: puzzles cost A LOT more than software. Sure, writing the software is expensive - but that's already done for puzzles, and even for software it's a one-time cost. Now comes the production. Molds are expensive, getting a factory is expensive, plastic is expensive, stickers are expensive, labor to put the puzzles together is expensive. And that's BEFORE you have even sold anything! Each V7 probably costs 30 euros to make and you have to make maybe a thousand before you can put them on the market. If it costs you virtually nothing to produce software (at the most it'll be the cost of CDs and packaging which is like $2 per copy, i.e. nothing), you have no reason NOT to produce, even if there is huge piracy going on. If you have software which isn't crap, trying to put it out in the marketplace is practically guaranteed to make you money.

For puzzles, it is so expensive to start mass production that, if you are not certain you will recoup the investment, you're not going to produce the puzzles at all. That's a HUGE loss to the puzzle community, which is why we need to foster an environment where puzzle makers can mass-produce original puzzles without having to worry about whether they will even make the money back. For software - who cares if you make your investment back? You already HAVE the code, and it can be copied an infinite amount of times for free. If you put it on the web and sell access to the full version, it doesn't even cost you anything. The community loses literally nothing if there is piracy, because it is always worth it for you to put your software on the market. Again: no amount of piracy will prevent the community from being able to buy your software, but it doesn't take that much to prevent the community from being able to buy a puzzle.

Put yourself in the Verdes' shoes. You have an awesome design for a puzzle, but it'll cost you $50,000 to produce. Are you going to do it? No, you won't, unless you are certain you'll make at least that much back. And if you know your product will be immediately pirated, and then sold for cheaper despite the fact that it's the same thing, you're probably not going to even TRY to mass-produce the puzzle. Your awesome designs will sit in a box forever.

I hope you can get sub-1:20 with an Eastsheen.
 
exo, how about instead of hypothetical situations that are completely different from the current situation, we focus on something that has already resulted from this.

Katsuhiko said:
I am raging.
I have not approved.
I sent the mail of the protest to Mr. Meffert a little while ago.

I hope he discontinues sales of faked Void cube.

I stop having business talk with him.
The commercialization of Pyracue and MasterPyraminx is called off.

I am very melancholic.

(Because I am not good at English, details of this topic are not so understood. I cannot believe happening of these kind of things, ...there is such a lot of men who steal others' ideas...)

Katsuhiko Okamoto
Click to expand...

This one situation has already cost the community at least two potential puzzles, why support knockoffs and cost it more?

Edit: Also, good luck trying to dropkick a puzzle with hollow pieces and cheap plastic
 
I really don’t see why every one is having such a big problem with mefferts/the Chinese ripping of the V-Cube mechanism/puzzle. 3x3x3 DIYs did the same exact thing to the "Rubiks Cube". (Sets up flame shields)

Paul Wagner said:
the question isnt is it good too have a knowckoff the question is is it good, does it blend?
Click to expand...

I almost fell off my chair laughing when I saw your post!
 
Odin said:
I really don’t see why every one is having such a big problem with mefferts/the Chinese ripping of the V-Cube mechanism/puzzle. 3x3x3 DIYs did the same exact thing to the "Rubiks Cube". (Sets up flame shields)
Click to expand...

No they didn't. DIY cubes are a modification on an expired patent. Even if the patent was still out there, it may have been hard for rubiks to take any action, because the differences in the mechanism may be enough to make them legal.
These cubes are ILLEGAL knockoffs of an existing and valid patent. There is no logical reason to believe that there are any real changes to the mechanism.
If you read some previous posts, a few people have explained that buying these fakes will help to insure that new and awesome puzzles (like the master pyraminx) will never see the market.

If you are fine with breaking the saw, forcing someone who has devoted much of his time and money into helping you get awesome cubes into bankruptcy, and ensure that new puzzles are never mass produced, then go ahead and buy the knockoffs. Just don't do it and think that its's no big deal.
 
Actually, the Void cube has no patent, and I personally feel more sorry for Okamoto than for Verdes.

People are reacting more over this compared to the 3x3 DIYs as rip-offs because Rubik's has already obviously broken even (and even more obviously, being internationally famous, very rich, and all), whilst these individuals have put out a lot of work and investment, and they are already getting pirated even before they can reap the rewards of their hard work, or even just break even.
 
Ethan Rosen said:
Odin said:
I really don’t see why every one is having such a big problem with mefferts/the Chinese ripping of the V-Cube mechanism/puzzle. 3x3x3 DIYs did the same exact thing to the "Rubiks Cube". (Sets up flame shields)
Click to expand...

No they didn't. DIY cubes are a modification on an expired patent. Even if the patent was still out there, it may have been hard for rubiks to take any action, because the differences in the mechanism may be enough to make them legal.
These cubes are ILLEGAL knockoffs of an existing and valid patent. There is no logical reason to believe that there are any real changes to the mechanism.
If you read some previous posts, a few people have explained that buying these fakes will help to insure that new and awesome puzzles (like the master pyraminx) will never see the market.

If you are fine with breaking the saw, forcing someone who has devoted much of his time and money into helping you get awesome cubes into bankruptcy, and ensure that new puzzles are never mass produced, then go ahead and buy the knockoffs. Just don't do it and think that its's no big deal.
Click to expand...

You COMPLETELY missed his point. Your first two paragraphs imply that legal issues are the reason that these knockoffs should not be produced, and you are 100% wrong because the patent is pending in China.

Second, you have no proof that the mechanism is an exact replica. If the mechanism is different, then it is not a knockoff. His 3x3x3 uses a different internal structure, thus it is not a Rubik's 3x3x3 knockoff. If it is, then his 5x5 cube is also a knockoff of the Rubik's professor cube, and buying his product takes away from Erno Rubik's profits, who spent time creating its structure. this is not true, however, so the Chinese product is genuine unless you can buy one, take it apart, and show me that it is the SAME on the inside as the V7.

I believe Verdes is much, much more deserving of a profit, since he has spent more time and effort to create a quality product, which he produced out of a passion for cubes, unlike the Chinese manufacturer (most likely). Of course, by the same logic, Rubik's brand 3x3x3 cubes deserve more profits than any DIY brand. The only difference between these two cases is that most people here have already bought DIYs, and believe that they are of better quality (for speedsolving). Being used to DIYs for so long has caused most of us to see absolutely no moral issues in buying a Chinese 3x3x3 knockoff.

bundat said:
People are reacting more over this compared to the 3x3 DIYs as rip-offs because Rubik's has already obviously broken even (and even more obviously, being internationally famous, very rich, and all), whilst these individuals have put out a lot of work and investment, and they are already getting pirated even before they can reap the rewards of their hard work, or even just break even.
Click to expand...

I agree with this statement 100%. This is the only reason why I will buy a V-cube instead of the Chinese 7x7x7 (which won't be now, of course :D)
 
Last edited:
@qqwref:

I don't see that much of a difference between that scenario and the one you had mentioned earlier; only the puzzles in the situation that they're aren't mass produced would be even more of a luxury, no?

Also, taking it out on China? Why not the individuals/companies producing these knock-offs? Why not human greed, or capitalism?

And how did you know that I don't have a V5? :p
(I do, however, have a V7 and a V6.)
 
bamman1108 said:
You COMPLETELY missed his point. Your first two paragraphs imply that legal issues are the reason that these knockoffs should not be produced, and you are 100% wrong because the patent is pending in China.
Click to expand...
Please provide proof that there is a patent pending. Last might I spoke to the producer or the fake 7x7s. She claimed that they had a patent. She refused to show me or direct me to any proof.

bamman1108 said:
Second, you have no proof that the mechanism is an exact replica. If the mechanism is different, then it is not a knockoff. His 3x3x3 uses a different internal structure, thus it is not a Rubik's 3x3x3 knockoff. If it is, then his 5x5 cube is also a knockoff of the Rubik's professor cube, and buying his product takes away from Erno Rubik's profits, who spent time creating its structure. this is not true, however, so the Chinese product is genuine unless you can buy one, take it apart, and show me that it is the SAME on the inside as the V7.
Click to expand...

See the post below yours.
 
Last edited:
Application number: 10/555,013
Publication number: US 2007/0057455 A1
Filing date: May 13, 2004

uspto said:
Treaties and Foreign Patents Since the rights granted by a U.S. patent extend only throughout the territory of the United States and have no effect in a foreign country, an inventor who wishes patent protection in other countries must apply for a patent in each of the other countries or in regional patent offices. Almost every country has its own patent law, and a person desiring a patent in a particular country must make an application for patent in that country, in accordance with the requirements of that country.
Click to expand...

Sorry for being so anal about this. I have no support for the Chinese manufacturer of the 7x7x7, they are legal as of now. BTW, this is the only patent application I could find online. There could easily be more, but several google searches under the application number, publishing number, US patent number, and application title gave me no results for me. If you can find the chinese patent, Mr. Meffert might reconsider making his product available.
 
Verdes has patents in many countries. Of course the USA one only affects products in the USA. My 7x7 box (from Oct. 2008) says EP1599261 covers most of Europe, then there is HK1086212 for Hong Kong (i.e. where Meffert is), 23956 for Egypt, 2320390 for Russia, 116890 for Singapore, 2005/08909 for South Africa, 79699 for Ukraine...
Then the pending ones, 20004241790 for Australia, PI 0410204-5 for Brazil, 2522585 for Canada, 200480013109.3 for China, 2151/KOLNP/2005 for India, W-00200503110 for Indonesia, 171549 for Israel, 2006-530607 for Japan, 10-205-7021428 for Korea, PA/a/2005/011887 for Mexico, 20055913 for Norway, 1-2005-502042 for the Philippines, 10/555,013 for the USA.

My dad informs me that under international patent law, patents (even pending patents) illegalize the knockoffs at basically every stage. You can get someone for producing knockoffs, selling knockoffs, and even owning (!!!) knockoffs if they are doing it in a country you have a patent in. But basically - yes, it's illegal in China... but I wonder whether fighting it would be more expensive than being pirated in the first place.
 
Last edited:
qqwref said:
Verdes has patents in many countries. Of course the USA one only affects products in the USA. My 7x7 box (from Oct. 2008) says EP1599261 covers most of Europe, then there is HK1086212 for Hong Kong (i.e. where Meffert is), 23956 for Egypt, 2320390 for Russia, 116890 for Singapore, 2005/08909 for South Africa, 79699 for Ukraine...
Then the pending ones, 20004241790 for Australia, PI 0410204-5 for Brazil, 2522585 for Canada, 200480013109.3 for China, 2151/KOLNP/2005 for India, W-00200503110 for Indonesia, 171549 for Israel, 2006-530607 for Japan, 10-205-7021428 for Korea, PA/a/2005/011887 for Mexico, 20055913 for Norway, 1-2005-502042 for the Philippines, 10/555,013 for the USA.

My dad informs me that under international patent law, patents (even pending patents) illegalize the knockoffs at basically every stage. You can get someone for producing knockoffs, selling knockoffs, and even owning (!!!) knockoffs if they are doing it in a country you have a patent in. But basically - yes, it's illegal in China... but I wonder whether fighting it would be more expensive than being pirated in the first place.
Click to expand...

I remember hearing that the patent was pending in China, which is why I raised the argument in the first place really, but is a pending patent really still in effect?
 
qqwref said:
I hope you can get sub-1:20 with an Eastsheen.
Click to expand...

I want to take that challenge :D keep an eye out on youtube.
But seriously, I think we should help V-cubes the best we can by not buying any of the knockoff **** from mefferts. Sadly it's very unlikely nobody will buy them at all.
I hope the mefferts 4x4 are not also 'stolen'? :S
 
bamman1108 said:
Second, you have no proof that the mechanism is an exact replica. If the mechanism is different, then it is not a knockoff. His 3x3x3 uses a different internal structure, thus it is not a Rubik's 3x3x3 knockoff. If it is, then his 5x5 cube is also a knockoff of the Rubik's professor cube, and buying his product takes away from Erno Rubik's profits, who spent time creating its structure. this is not true, however, so the Chinese product is genuine unless you can buy one, take it apart, and show me that it is the SAME on the inside as the V7.
Click to expand...

First of all, Erno Rubik did not invent the 4x4 or 5x5 cube. The design for the original Rubik's revenge was purchased from Peter Sebesteny, and the Rubik's Professor cube patent was purchased from Udo Krell. Both EastSheen 4x4 and 5x5 are patented by Chen Sen Li, and obviously the V-Cube patents are owned by Verdes. These illegal 7x7 copies do not have their own patent, so you cannot group them in with these other cubes.


I believe Verdes is much, much more deserving of a profit, since he has spent more time and effort to create a quality product, which he produced out of a passion for cubes, unlike the Chinese manufacturer (most likely). Of course, by the same logic, Rubik's brand 3x3x3 cubes deserve more profits than any DIY brand. The only difference between these two cases is that most people here have already bought DIYs, and believe that they are of better quality (for speedsolving). Being used to DIYs for so long has caused most of us to see absolutely no moral issues in buying a Chinese 3x3x3 knockoff.
Click to expand...

You can hardly use the same logic. You are operating under the false belief that DIYs are just mindless copies of Rubik's brand 3x3s with screws and removable caps. I'm sure a rather great deal of time went into creating many of the different types of DIYs, and it certainly shows. Many have strikingly different designs (type AII and AIII) and are clearly different even though they use the same base structure.

If Rubik's wants people to buy their products, they need to get with the times and start selling something worth buying. I shouldn't have to hope that my storebought turns out to be good and not a piece of crap. I should know what I'm buying. I bought two old Type A's for Christmas, and if I had not stickered one differently I wouldn't be able to tell them apart. The same should be true for all out-of-the-box products, but sadly it is not.
 
Ton said:
msemtd said:
daniel0731ex said:
(meffert's 3x3 is also a ripoff)
Click to expand...
So is the mf8 megaminx currently supplied Meffert's but at least he's licensed to make them, unlike the Void cube or V-Cube 7 :)
Click to expand...

So lets ask mefferts , before accusing, maybe there is an arrangement.....
Click to expand...

I received a very extensive email explaining what happened and the intension of Uwe Meffert. As I expected he is trying to help the inventors as I understand his ideas, he wants to stop illegal copy cats by
working with companies that have legal patents in China for the puzzles
they are copying. This is in short the China market and is a different legal playground, from this mail to me Uwe Meffert acts in the best interest of Mr Verdes and Katsuhiko Okamoto. At the same time I understand that Mr Verdes and Katsuhiko Okamoto are not happy that there are companies that produce copies.

It think it is also in the best interest of Mr Verdes and Katsuhiko Okamoto, that we do not interfere and accuse all the people involved.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

lordblendi
Looking for old Meffert’s tiled megaminx, 4x4 and 5x5 (both white and black) for purchase
Replies
0
Views
350
lordblendi
lordblendi
1
Alien Beef Jerky: A Meffert's Goldmine?
Replies
0
Views
269
1x1 wr holder!
1
GenTheSnail
Uwe Meffert has passed away
Replies
5
Views
2,094
Deleted member 36445
D
L
QJ Pyraminx Cystal vs. Meffert's Pyraminx Crystal.
Replies
0
Views
681
Lt-UnReaL
L
cfolder
(ALREADY BOUGHT) WTB: Meffert's Kokonotsu Pillow
Replies
1
Views
716
Michael Womack
Michael Womack
Back
Top