Mefferts 7x7 and Holey Cube!!!
- Thread starter ConnorCuber
- Start date
Bryan
Premium Member
Let's hope V-Cube amends their claims like they did on the US Patent, because the original claims were just terrible. The claims of the patent are what are enforcible. The claims themselves specified the number of pieces that each puzzle had, so by changing that, you avoid the claim altogether.
This is why those 1-800-Patent people suck. From the patent lawyers' perspective, the narrower the claims, the easier it is for a file, but that limits the scope of the invention. The broader the claims, the harder it may be to file (with more objections, etc with the USPTO), but the better of a patent you have.
When the V-Cube patent was first published, I e-mail them and told them about this, but they didn't listen.
This is why those 1-800-Patent people suck. From the patent lawyers' perspective, the narrower the claims, the easier it is for a file, but that limits the scope of the invention. The broader the claims, the harder it may be to file (with more objections, etc with the USPTO), but the better of a patent you have.
When the V-Cube patent was first published, I e-mail them and told them about this, but they didn't listen.
MichaelErskine
Premium Member
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2008
- Messages
- 1,244
- Location
- Sherwood, Nottingham, UK
- WCA ID
- 2008ERSK01
- YouTube
- Visit Channel
I do hope that Uwe Meffert resolves this amicably - the ball is in his court. He really shouldn't have made this announcement without the express consent of the other two puzzle creating parties. Perhaps he solicited but failed to get a positive response. To then decide to force the issue by going ahead regardless is a folly.
With respect to the discussions going on in this forum, over on the TwistyPuzzles forum, on the Chinese bbs.mf8.com.cn forums, and probably others besides -- we can only guess at what is really going on; it's all conjecture until the information gets out. But you can see how this has affected those who love the twisty puzzles and in what high regard the creators are held. At the end of the day we are faced with the spectre of personal gain casting a shadow over morality and as puzzles gain popularity I can only expect things to get worse unless those who care speak out against it.
There. I said it
Last edited:
jonny guitar
Regular
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2008
- Messages
- 230
I feel for both these original inventors but I am not even a little bit surprised that this has taken place. As my moniker implies, I am a guitar player and with guitars, amps, and especially effects pedals, the practice of stealing designs/reverse engineering circuits is the norm; one guy makes a great product and it is stolen by every other company (some tweak the circuit very slightly with a part that really doesn't change the sound but some are just exact copies). In this case it is easy to support the original guy but in everyday life it gets hard....think about generic drugs, certain no-name products etc.
jcuber
Veteran
New newsletter at www.mefferts.com .
Everything isn't nearly what it seemed, mefferts is trying to help verdes (or so they say).
After reading the letter, I say screw chineese patents, this is clearly just a loophole found in chineese patent law. Still, verdes should have gone into more detail with the patent explaination.
Everything isn't nearly what it seemed, mefferts is trying to help verdes (or so they say).
After reading the letter, I say screw chineese patents, this is clearly just a loophole found in chineese patent law. Still, verdes should have gone into more detail with the patent explaination.
Unknown.soul
Veteran
That small 7% commission still doesn't reimburse Verdes.
jcuber
Veteran
It's better than nothing, but the big issue is the chineese patent.
E
Ethan Rosen
Guest
http://translate.google.com/transla...立方体逻辑玩具&ipc=A63F9/08(2006.01)I&sl=zh-CN&tl=en
That patent seems to say that Mr Verdes does in fact own the patent, and therefore Mefferts is either ill informed or lying.
AvGalen
Premium Member
Where does that say that Mr Verdes got the patent? I only see a request/application for the patent but no "patent granted" anywhere. And the description is indeed very short and much less detailed than the others we saw before. The message from Mefferts might not be a pleasant one, but I think he knows what he is talking about
E
Ethan Rosen
Guest
Sorry, I didn't explain my post well. This is a translated version of the sink that Meffert gave.
meffert said:
Contrary to what he claims, that link does not state that Mr. Chan owns the patent.
Also, this was posted at TP
verdes said:
jcuber
Veteran
So that means that Mr. Chan's claim is complete (I will let the filters get this) bull ****, and he probably said that to discourage people from looking into it further? Anyone who makes a v-cube knockoff should rot in hell.
I feel better that I finally stated my opinion on this.
I feel better that I finally stated my opinion on this.
Markus Pirzer
Regular
Do you really think the patent explanation is to short? At least the European patent seems to be very detailed:
http://v-cubes.com/pdf/European_patent.pdf
I don't think that it is possible to describe the V-Cubes more detailed than in that one.
AvGalen
Premium Member
The CHINESE patent explanation is to short. I don't understand why they didn't use the European patent explanation. The Chinese won't take the European explanation into account at all
E
Ethan Rosen
Guest
According to someone on TP, that is just an introduction to the patent, and the full patent is 78 pages long
http://twistypuzzles.com/forum/download/file.php?id=9859
http://twistypuzzles.com/forum/download/file.php?id=9859
deco122392
Regular
hahaha heh... wow haha wow every single time i look at the patents im always blown away by there sheer amazingness... i just dont understand how there can be anyway,anyway at all to find a loopwhole that legaly permits the sale of these cubes by anyone other then the v-cubes company... its so detaild and... i just dont believe that its rite to sell knock off v-cubes even if they find a legal way to do so. (yes im finally putting my 2 cents in after waiting and reading)
ExoCorsair
Member
One thing that bothers me about the Mefferts newsletter is that this Mr. Chan person is never really identified before being mentioned (i.e. what is his company).
That and the second red paragraph makes little sense to me (mostly because of this Mr. Chan person).
That and the second red paragraph makes little sense to me (mostly because of this Mr. Chan person).
jcuber
Veteran
Mefferts megaminx now on reserve out of stock items page- enter e-mail adresses everybody! this is what decides how many they will make!
ben1996123
Banned
can someone show me a photo of a mefferts 7x7
jcuber
Veteran
They won't be sold, but they looked almost exactly like a white v-7.
Kubinator97
Regular
Picture?? (need 1o characters)
Similar threads
