China copies of Jobo Products

[mshchem]

It is a reel for sheet film. Listing is "2509n for jobo 2500 system " I have genuine Jobo 2509n reels . Is "2509n for jobo 2500 system " misleading ? I think so. Is it being represented as a Genuine Jobo product? Strictly speaking, no. It clearly states in the fine print, country of manufacture, China. Does Jobo make 2509n reels in China? I don't think so.
I didn't mean to start an Internet war here. My only motivation was to let people know. It has been my experience that copies of genuine products usually disappoint.
PE I'm working on my punctuation and spelling, but as I received my education in US public school in the 70's It seems I missed out. I have a good friend , PhD in Engineering , he attended Catholic schools growing up in India. When I need help in grammar and usage I call Srikanth
Best Regards Mike

 

[mwdake]

It clearly states in the fine print, country of manufacture, China.

It also clearly states under Brand as being "Unbranded/Generic".

 

[mshchem]

It also clearly states under Brand as being "Unbranded/Generic".

Clearly .

 

[Photo Engineer]

Mike, my comment was made in jest and was poking fun at the US education system.

All of us make mistakes.

PE

 

[AgX]

Patents get renewed and re-tweaked.

That is a common misconception often seen here at Apug.
Patents have a very limited lifetime (iin contrast to other intellectual properties).
Typically the legal maximum is 20 years.

 

[Craig]

Patents get renewed and re-tweaked.

My speciality is patents. A patent cannot be renewed. Trademarks can, but patents cannot. Patents can also not get "re-tweaked". Patents generally have a life of 20 years from the date of filing, not the date of issue, which can typically be 3-5 years after filing. Copyright, Trademark, and Patent are independent forms of Intellectual Property that do not overlap. Something that can be protected by copyright cannot be covered by a Trademark or Patent, and so on for the other forms. Only one type of protection can be applicable for one thing.

Patents are also national. i.e. they are only good in the country they are issued in. So if you have a US patent on an invention, and not a Canadian one, I am free to copy your invention and offer it for sale in Canada.

In this case, even if we assume that Jobo has a valid US patent (which is unlikely now), and not a corresponding Chinese patent; the seller China that is making them there and offering them for sale in China is not infringing any of Jobo's patents. If you bought one and imported it into a country where Jobo has a valid patent, then you would be infringing the patent by importing it; and Jobo could sue you. Also unlikely, as suing your customers tends to be a bad business practice.

 

[AgX]

If you bought one and imported it into a country where Jobo has a valid patent, then you would be infringing the patent by importing it; and Jobo could sue you. Also unlikely, as suing your customers tends to be a bad business practice.

That only would be an infringement if you would import such item for commercial reasons.
That means to do a sales business with it but also to use it within your own commercial production.
The latter could basically apply on a photographer though.

Though details may vary between countries.


Yes, patents can be be kind of "renewed". As one has to be active to keep a patent alive during its maximum lifetime. This means paying the periodic fees it. On the otherv hasnd that means if an owner no longer see an economic benefit from it he may let it loose.

Another wellspread misconception here is that of free patents as being a war booty.

 

[Craig]

The laws do vary by country, but most that I am familiar with don't distinguish between commercial use and personal use - unlike copyright. Infringement is infringement, no matter how it is done. The odds of an individual being sued are very remote though, there is no money in it.

I hadn't thought of maintenance fees as a renewal, but I suppose it sort of is. However, the maximum term of a patent cannot be extended; only shortened by the non-payment of the fees.

 

[DREW WILEY]

It has little to with law or even basic honesty. Big box stores here violate patents rather frequently, just like some of their major suppliers making
stuff in China violate disclosure labeling laws because it's still more profitable for them to pay fines than give up the obscene amount of profit behind
bait and switch marketing. So it's hard enough to successfully sue anyone even within the US for a patent infringement unless there is a giant amount of payout at stake which will tempt a determined lawyer. Film drums hardly constitute that kind of opportunity, and trying to collect from
anyone in China would be a hopeless task anyway. Besides, the specific design would have to illegally mimic something about the Jobo drum that
was unique. Merely being usable with the Jobo system would not constitute that, even if the patent was current. Using someone's brand logo without
permission or licensing is another matter, but that happens all the time too, to the extent of many cargo containers of counterfeit goods coming into Port here every day.

 

[AgX]

The laws do vary by country, but most that I am familiar with don't distinguish between commercial use and personal use.

The USA is the only important country in this matter that does not divide between commercial and private use of patented matter.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Everything above is true. But no one has said anything about improving on a patented idea. For example, the original Kodachrome was repatented several times due to improvements in both the emulsions and the process. I was a small part of that.

PE

 

[DREW WILEY]

Well, it they have a patent on trying to manipulate elephant DNA into giving live birth to an extinct mastodon, maybe somebody will file just one more
magical patent on Kodachrome to bring it back from the dead. ...Double, double cauldron bubble, eye of newt, toe of frog, skin of cat, tongue of dog...

 

[Photo Engineer]

Pancreas of Drew Wiley!

 

[Craig]

Everything above is true. But no one has said anything about improving on a patented idea. For example, the original Kodachrome was repatented several times due to improvements in both the emulsions and the process. I was a small part of that.

PE

Not so fast PE!

To review, there are 4 basic requirements to obtain a patent: the invention must be patentable subject matter (i.e. not something that is a trademark, or a prohibited thing), it must be new, not obvious, and useful. All these terms have specific meanings in patent law, and they don't always mean the same as in ordinary English - particularly obviousness.

It is the "new" requirement that prevents patenting the same thing more than once. Or even once if it has been disclosed to the public. You can't patent something that is already known to mankind, since you can't invent anything if it's already known. As an example say the Kodachrome patent you referenced has 3 essential elements (or constituents if you like, I don't mean elements in a chemistry sense) A, B, and C, and these are what is described in the claims. Further research at some later point determines that element D is a useful improvement to the film, and a patent is applied for on D. This later patent can only have D in the claims, and not A, B, and C as these have already been patented in the first patent. From the perspective of the D patent application, A, B, and C are not new as they have been previously patented, and thus fail the "new" test for patentability. It may be necessary to have elements A, B, and C to make D work, but that doesn't matter from a patent point of view. When this gets tricky is if one party owns the patent on A, B, and C, and another owns the patent on D. They would probably need a cross license, where each party grants a licence to the other to practice the invention in their patents.

The vast majority of patents are improvements on what has gone before, but the existence (or not) of a subsequent improvement does not affect the earlier patent that the improvement was based on.

There are other ways that patent families of related patents can be created, but that gets complicated and I suspect this lesson in patent practice has gone on long enough already.

 

[mshchem]

Al Gore invented the internet . I bet he wishes he had got a good patent attorney

 

[Photo Engineer]

Craig, the first Kodachrome involved development of all layers in 1 color and then diffusion controlled bleaching in the 2 unwanted color images. The second patent involved 2 color re-exposures and no diffusion controlled bleaches. The third involved a new and improved developer. Each maintained the product as it advanced and the patents were granted world wide.

PE

 

[Craig]

That's a different situation, as each generation of Kodachrome was new. The way I read your earlier comment was that EK was repatenting the same thing and gaining a longer patent life in each step - that is impossible.

Do you recall which process was which in your description above? Is development of all layers K11 or 12?

 

[Sirius Glass]

All of this Kodachrome talk could raise Voldemort from the P-Net!

 

[Photo Engineer]

I don't think that the original process had a number, just "the Kodachrome process".

PE

 

[Craig]

Wasn't there one process in 1935-38, and then another from 1938-approximately 1952 when sheet film was withdrawn? I thought I read the early process was not as stable over time as the colours in the second and subsequent processes.

 

[Photo Engineer]

There were 3 or 4 processes Craig. I am not sure as several were implemented before I joined EK.

PE

 

[jeztastic]

That's an issue with companies not working local and not fostering the resources there are close, insted choosing to squeeze out things. I'm on Drew's points.

At least Kodak film is made in Rochester, NY; and Fuji in Tokyo, Japan!

And Ilford in Cheshire, UK!

 

[Prest_400]

In these forums we have a kind of Godwin's law that says: "As an APUG discussion grows longer, the probability of a discussion involving Kodachrome approaches 1"

EDIT: Saw it was you PE mentioning it in relation to patents. Interesting story and very welcome. Not the usual lets remake Kodachrome in the backyard.
On the topic of Chinese products, I recently got myself into getting a 18650 LED flashlight... Photographers love light, so it's another slippery slope line.
It will take longer and more than one. I recently received an $10 one with a joke LED module. It did work 5 minutes and I found that the LED was let loose without any soldering nor board. My bad. Replacement module is coming from another supplier, the body is rather decent.
The problem: Between batteries and units, there are clones of a clone of a fake and it's simply chaotic, no one even knows who was the first manufacturer of a clonic design. Fakes might work but be so shabby as the one I have.

After all, I opted for a newly design $35 light with more features and onboard charging, which has good reviews and I hope is really good; Then I'll have a Panasonic cell to put in. WIll take a while as it's shiping from China.

 

[mshchem]

The problem: Between batteries and units, there are clones of a clone of a fake and it's simply chaotic, no one even knows who was the first manufacturer of a clonic design. Fakes might work but be so shabby as the one I have.

This is it in a nutshell. The fakers don't understand what they are trying to make, chaos. People that cant load a SS spiral never used a genuine Hewes product.

 

[AgX]

99 posts so far. And we still do not know what is wrong with that reel.
If there is anything wrong with it at all...