. . . Anyway, the point is that China is not exactly known for patent enforcement, to say the least. . . .

GO

My favorite of the new names for ClimbX shoes is a slipper called the "Rad Moc". Get it? Rad Moc!

Hahahahaha!

GO

I have no idea whether ClimbX has infringed Mad Rock's patents or otherwise violated any of its intellectual property rights; the mere fact that its shoes look the same isn't really enough information to have a view one way or the other.

Clearly Climb X came up with those completely identical designs all on their own.

China may not be known for patent enforcement, but that's beside the point unless you're somehow interested in shoes being sold in China for use in China.
Assuming we're talking about shoes imported into the US, US patent law provides a remedy (see relevant part of US Patent Act pasted below).

But if the shoes really are the same, the only was I can see ClimbX avoiding patent infringement is if MadRock's patents don't cover its own shoes, which is theoretically possible.

Here's an article that should shed some light on this...

[snip]

Thanks for digging that up. It seems to be well written and is the first thing I've read about this new company that makes any sense.

If it is true that Mad Rock will have lower production costs in Vietnam than Climb X has in China, then Climb X might have trouble competing. My money is on Mad Rock.

Edit: Does anyone else think it strange that we have heard little, if any, public comment about this from Mad Rock?

Jay

For somethings its better to not patten, say the KFC secret recipe cause patents only last so long then you exposed it and its up for grabs. So if you feel like you can hide a formula go for it. But when all you have to do is look at it, say alien cams and know how to do it you have to patent. I think if Mad Rock holds any patents on the shoes Climbx will have trouble selling in the US at least with front channels, there is always ebay and maybe direct sales.

I was wondering about that. What about Europe? Do they honor US patent claims? If so, then could Climb X be left with essentially no Western markets?

Thanks for repeating my point for the rc.com audience. Clearly, my post was too succinct, grammatical, and well spelled.

Jay

Thanks for digging that up. It seems to be well written and is the first thing I've read about this new company that makes any sense.

If it is true that Mad Rock will have lower production costs in Vietnam than Climb X has in China, then Climb X might have trouble competing. My money is on Mad Rock.

Edit: Does anyone else think it strange that we have heard little, if any, public comment about this from Mad Rock?

Jay

There are two other very key bits left out:

1 - This is more or less exactly how Mad Rock was started in the first place. The guy who started it was an employee at Five Ten who set up shop in China to make cheap knockoffs...

As long as we're trying to get an accurate idea of historical events here, it should be pointed out that Young Chu was actually contracted to manufacture 5.10 products in China and did so for a number of years before having a falling out with 5.10--when he then began to produce Mad Rock products in that same factory.

Curt

As long as we're trying to get an accurate idea of historical events here, it should be pointed out that Young Chu was actually contracted to manufacture 5.10 products in China and did so for a number of years before having a falling out with 5.10--when he then began to produce Mad Rock products in that same factory.

Curt

In general, yes. All World Trade Organization (WTO) member states are required to participate in the WTO's intellectual property regime, called TRIPS (trade-related aspects of intellectual property rights). The rules regarding TRIPS gel very well with the US patent office. Since virtually all "Western" states are WTO member states, they must comply with TRIPS, and in general, US patents.

I´d argue yes but no on this one. One of the principal characteristics of a patent is territoriality, ie it´s only good in the territory of the state granting it. While there have been at least 2 major international efforts aimed at consolidating patent laws, these are not yet plainly enforceable in every state.

To make a US patent enforceable in a foreign country, one must file for a patent in that country.

A loophole opened to address the above (with the treaty of Paris on Patent Cooperation), is granting the patent holder&seeker a period of 12 months to file an International Petition, counted from the legal date of the original patent (the date the patent was petitioned/filed for). What that does is use the International Search Authority to seek out the worldwide state of the art, and then turn over its results to the patent seeker, who then decides in which countries they will file for patent protection. Overall, the patent holder has about 42 months to file for a patent in a PCT cosignatary country.

AFTER the 12 month grace period, if no Intl. petition is filed, the patented invention enters the state of the art, and is thusly no protectable via patent, in say Brazil or Mexico.

If MR did not seek out intl. patent protection for its products in due time, it is tres fuked in other countries, but not in the US market.

Coca-cola isn't patented for that reason as well... they'd have to disclose the recipe. Not an uncommon practice, from what I can tell.

US Navy--
I can see from your post that I didn't make my point clearly. Let me try again because I want to correct a misunderstanding that many people seem to have.

In general, a company is free to copy a competitor's products. It does not matter that it is a complete knock off. Of course there are many exceptions:

You cannot (legally) infringe another company's patents. But patents don't usually protect things like rockclimbing shoes (there exceptions to that, and I believe there were references to patents in this thread. One would have to read the relevant patents and see what inventions they cover, and compare the patents to ClimbX's shoes. Until that is done, it is premature to suggest that the ClimbX is or is not infringing Mad Rock's patents).

You also cannot (legally) copy a company's trademarks. So I could make a shoe that is identical to a Nike shoe EXCEPT I cannot include the swoosh or something confusingly similar to the swoosh. Here, the name ClimbX is of course in no way similar to Mad Rock.

There are exceptions to every rule of course and I've also seen allegations made of theft of trade secrets (without any suggestion as to what those trade secrets were).

My main point, and what I think many people fail to understand, it that it is generally OK to make knock off products. That's one reason why patents can be so important--they are in general the only way to stop other companies from making functionally equivalent knock offs of any products.

There is probably a valuable lesson to business owners to carefully consider what steps they can take to protect their intellectual property and also what agreements they should have with their employees and contractors in the nature of non-competes and such (which can be a complicated area of the law and the rules vary significantly across jurisdictions).

So, climb x is copying mad rock's copies and selling them for 10 bucks less. What an outrage.

Well, a quick search of the USPTO site turned up patents for the guy from MR:
D516783 (shoe heel)
6470599 (concave shoe sole)
6050003 (boot with outside preformed stress relief)
7107656 (safety buckle)

Looks like he has some provisional ones as well...
20070209114 (sleeping bag with air pockets)
20060037179 (another safety buckle)
20050229364 (the safety buckle from 7107656)
20050138848 (climbing shoe with tension support sole)
20040226193 (climbing shoe with hooking rim)
20030196354 (climbing shoe with hooking teeth on the heel)
20030196350 (climbing shoe with lateral sling shot band)
20030172555 (internal split toe with a creased sole for climbing shoes)
20030115776 (climbing shoe with multiple hardness rubber sole)
20030037463 (climbing shoe with hooking rim)
20020152642 (climbing shoe with concave sole)

So yeah, if ClimbX is using stuff from any of them I'd expect things to become rather interesting.