Violation of Ruth Niles Patent

Boycott

May I please be so bold as to suggest the we as his customers should put him on notice that we, the community, will not tolerate such conduct. That we will not purchase anything he sells until he becomes morale and ethical much less legal. Others do the same as what he has done and we should treat them in the same manner!!
Place him on notice and boycott his products!!
P lamb
 
Ron,

I think that the point of my post and probably Franks has been missed. I certainly don't, and I'm pretty sure that Frank also doesn't condone thievery of any kind. Neither of us has advocated for either party. Both of us have advocated that due process be followed. Nothing else has been said. I am suggesting that we follow evidence and law rather than emotion.

Just a thought here (a question, not a statement).....what happens if the authorities follow this up (as they should) and find that no fraud, criminal act or violations were committed? Will we hear about it? Is it even possible that maybe, just maybe, there's been a mistake made somewhere?

Just some thoughts....

cheers

John

Barbara was right, you should go back and read the thread on WC.
 
Just a thought here (a question, not a statement).....what happens if the authorities follow this up (as they should) and find that no fraud, criminal act or violations were committed? Will we hear about it? Is it even possible that maybe, just maybe, there's been a mistake made somewhere?

Just some thoughts....

cheers

John
The "authorities" do not follow up on patent infringement claims. Any issues with patent infringement have to be pursued by the patent holder.

Patent issues are civil issues so the only "authorities" who get involved are the court to adjudicate the dispute between the two parties.

If you want to do anything, Peter has the right approach. Boycott his products and let him know of your actions. But economics is a powerful factor. A sizable number of people will buy his product if the price is significantly less, even if they know of the patent issues.

Mike
 
Barbara was right, you should go back and read the thread on WC.

I did read it, and I have just gone back to read it again just in case I missed something. I see lots of emotion, but no verifiable facts. Yup...the stoppers "look" the same....are they?

The "authorities" do not follow up on patent infringement claims. Any issues with patent infringement have to be pursued by the patent holder.

It seems that Ruth thinks otherwise as she wrote this :

The Customs people said when we get proof he shipped to the US (which we have a package), it's their jurisdiction and "we will take care of it."


Don't get me wrong .... if there's a proven theft I'm all for whatever punishment and financial reimbursement is proper. I just hate seeing people accused and then convicted in a court of public opinion without "real" evidence being presented.

At any rate, logic and reason rarely survive in an emotion based discussion, so I think I'll just wave the white flag, retire from this losing position and wish Ruth good luck if it proves out that she has been stolen from.

cheers

John
 
I did read it, and I have just gone back to read it again just in case I missed something. I see lots of emotion, but no verifiable facts. Yup...the stoppers "look" the same....are they?



It seems that Ruth thinks otherwise as she wrote this :




Don't get me wrong .... if there's a proven theft I'm all for whatever punishment and financial reimbursement is proper. I just hate seeing people accused and then convicted in a court of public opinion without "real" evidence being presented.

At any rate, logic and reason rarely survive in an emotion based discussion, so I think I'll just wave the white flag, retire from this losing position and wish Ruth good luck if it proves out that she has been stolen from.

cheers

John

There is a second package which the post office has, it's in the thread
 
I did read it, and I have just gone back to read it again just in case I missed something. I see lots of emotion, but no verifiable facts. Yup...the stoppers "look" the same....are they?



It seems that Ruth thinks otherwise as she wrote this :




Don't get me wrong .... if there's a proven theft I'm all for whatever punishment and financial reimbursement is proper. I just hate seeing people accused and then convicted in a court of public opinion without "real" evidence being presented.

At any rate, logic and reason rarely survive in an emotion based discussion, so I think I'll just wave the white flag, retire from this losing position and wish Ruth good luck if it proves out that she has been stolen from.

cheers

John
I wish that were true. While I'm not a patent attorney, I've been involved in more patent infringement cases than I like to think about.

Think about this for a minute. You're a customs person. Someone comes to you and claims that another person is infringing your patent. How do you (the customs person) know whether that's true or not. You certainly do not have the right, or even the knowledge, to make that determination. It's only when a court determines that infringement has occurred that the customs person would take any action, and only then, under order from the court.

If what you say were true, I'd go to customs and tell them that all of my foreign competitors are infringing my patents. By the time it was sorted out, they'd be out of business.

A patent only gives you the right to enforce it through the courts. You will not get any help from the "authorities" until you get a court ruling of infringement and a court order to do something (like seize the merchandise at the border).

And to build something that infringes another person's patent is not considered "theft" - it's infringement, a civil matter (to be specific, it's not infringement until a court rules that it is infringement). To make it theft, the person would have to have stolen trade secrets, but then it would not be a patent dispute. Even if the other person took your patent and made an exact copy, using your patent teachings, it's not theft - just infringement. If they buy one of your products and copy it exactly, it's not theft - it's infringement (if you have a patent). And if you don't have a patent, (or copyright or some other legal right) they have the absolute right to make and sell that copy.

Mike

[Even in a situation where you can hold the two items up to each other and see that they are exactly the same, only a court can make the determination of infringement. One defense that could be offered is that the product existed prior to Ruth developing it. For example, someone else may have built a product just like that and offered them for sale at a crafts fair. Even if Ruth did not know of that product, it could qualify as "prior art" and make the patent invalid. That's why the customs people can't take action without a court order. The person accused has the right to defend him or herself.

Unfortunately, having a patent is of little value unless the product it covers is a really big seller. If the revenue is small, as this is, the patent holder just cannot afford to pursue it. And even if they do pursue it, it will be years before the case is brought to trial and the appeals are exhausted (if the other person wants to really fight it).]

[Just a thought, but Ruth's best avenue might be to license the guy for a certain amount for each unit shipped into the US. For example, she agrees not to pursue the case in return for $0.50 for each unit he ships into the US. Of course, he might not agree to that, but it would be cheaper for everyone to seek some solution than to fight.]
 
Last edited:
Top