quick clean is the exact same as a common uphostlry cleaner used for cars.
VAP
VAP
Trying to Steel another Idea
- Thread starter mr8ball
- Start date
A concept few of you may ever have heard of:
Patent laws are generally destructive. They are simply government granted monopolies that lessen progress through competition.
Imagine if the first guy who invented a car was granted a patent on the concept of a car. He could lope along in business without improving his product without the pressure of competition.
Usually only the already powerful companies can extract value out of patents these days anyway.
Another concept is that there are a million good ideas for every one that can be turned into fruition via good business sense and capability.
My recommendation to your friend would be to improve his marketing, branding, distribution and product and use traditional methods of authentication of product via approved distributors.
Patent laws are generally destructive. They are simply government granted monopolies that lessen progress through competition.
Imagine if the first guy who invented a car was granted a patent on the concept of a car. He could lope along in business without improving his product without the pressure of competition.
Usually only the already powerful companies can extract value out of patents these days anyway.
Another concept is that there are a million good ideas for every one that can be turned into fruition via good business sense and capability.
My recommendation to your friend would be to improve his marketing, branding, distribution and product and use traditional methods of authentication of product via approved distributors.
There in lies the marketing problem.vapoolplayer said:
Even if that claim is not true, their marketing has failed to convince otherwise with a great many potential customers.
david hodges
Registered
vapoolplayer said:
Vap
Just to set the record straight I am the inventor of Quick-Clean. I do hold the patent on the formula and the trademark on the name. Quick-Clean formula is not sold or distributed in any industry except billiards. It works on a completely different principal than rug and fabric cleaners and I do not recommend you use them on your table. If you or anyone is interested on what makes it work you may call me on my toll free number 1 866 240-2789.
Have a great day
David Hodges
Colin Colenso said:
While I'll admit that the patent process these days (especially in the case of software patents and companies building "patent portfolios") is messed up, your reasoning is a bit shaky.
The patent process was developed to encourage innovation, not to "kill compretition". It ensured that an inventor would have legal rights to his invention and not have it copied or stolen the minute he introduced it. The man who invented a car (to use your example) would have been perfectly entitled to a patent which allowed him the exclusive right to produce it and recoup his investment in R&D. After his patent expired (17 years after issue), the concept would become public domain and everybody could make cars. Or, as is much more often the case, he would allow licensed the technology to other companies to make cars.
It also encourages further innovation to find a better way to do something without violating a previous patent. GIF used to be pretty much the standard for images until somebody (CompuServe?) decided to try to enforce the patent on LZW compression after years of ignoring it. Now you have JPEG (which has better compression) and PNG (which is a completely open format for those who are wary of JPEG).
How badly the process has been abused is up for discussion, but it was certainly NOT designed to "lessen progress."
mr8ball
Active member
BeeMan said:
Hi I understood i was just saying i know the guy is wrong. When i started this post i was just hopeing the message would get back to the guy and let him see that this kind of thing wasnt going to be allowd in the billiard world. Thanks again for the spport, Doug
When I saw this, I was assuming Dave Hodges renamed his product. The site is BCn, where Hodges has been a sponsor and the picture shows Quick Clean "as seen on TV". I don't think Billiard Club TV or Fox Sports would balantly steal Hodges idea especially since he is a commercial tv air time advertisor.
Why not ask BCn before we make assumptions and take business away from Hodges?
Jim
Why not ask BCn before we make assumptions and take business away from Hodges?
Jim
david hodges
Registered
jhendri2 said:
Yes billiard club network and Rob Sokora has stolen my product and idea. He was my distributor for a year. Rob Sokora demanded that I give him and vested interest in my company or he would ditch me and copy my product. Sure enough this is what he has done. What he is doing is a switch and bait on his site. If you call he will bad talk my cleaner and tell you his is better. He has also put pressure on the promoter of the US Open to be the official cleaner. I got the title because I had a product that worked. It takes a LOW kind of person to use pressure to get my title. If the industry stands for this we will never have a sport that is recognized. Rob Sokora has made it where nobody or their products are safe not to say that we have taken a step in the wrong direction.
David Hodges
mr8ball
Active member
jhendri2 said:
I also contacted Rob about it and he told me that he had 2 products now and his website was being updated and that if I had a beef to file a greivance. Does anyone out there know how to do this? I will try to do it because I think this man is wrong and people like this should be banned from billiards. He is also using his TV promotion to put the pressure on the US Open. If I were Barry I would tell him to pack it up and I would have ESPN come and do it theirselves. David has been at the US Open supporting it for at least 10 years either selling pool stick's (Parrot Cue's) or as Quick Clean keeping the tables clean. I think that Barry should take that into consideration.
david hodges said:
How can he do that if it is patented, where is he getting the product if not from you? If he is just knocking off the idea with another product, then so be it. If it is no good people will continue to buy your product, if it is, you have some compitation.
david hodges
Registered
macguy said:
Mac guy
I do not have a problem with compition, what I have a problem with is that I was his major sponsor he was my world distributor. I do not think that is not right for him to try and make me GIVE him interest in my company or he would copy my product. I have some samples of his product at my chemist now to make sure that it is not the same as mine. I will have my samples this week and I will test it to see if it works. I do know what it has to do and not do and I know that he does not have that knowledge. It should look funny to you that he has it on his site looking like I have changed the name of my product. If he weren’t doing something underhanded why would this be? He is telling people that it is the same product as Quick-Clean, why is this.
David Hodges
david hodges said:
GO TO A LAWYER...A REAL ONE.
I'll bill you $200 for my advice...lol
ruk
Snapshot9 said:
To help clarify the situation: Patents would help to protect the invention, whereas a trademark would help prevent the stealing of his product's packaging, marketing etc.
With a patent, the owner could sue for infringement.
With a trademark, the owner could sue a person for selling a product that is confusingly similar to their trademarked product. [There are other causes of action under the Lanham Act, but this one seems to apply nicely]
PM with Q's.
-td
Just a couple quick comments:
Good luck!
-td
This is a good idea on paper, but is not very convincing in the legal world. It's more like an urban legend than anything. I have a certified envelope on my wall to prove this point: The envelope is addressed, stamped, delivered, and certified with a date 4 years ago, BUT it is not sealed. At any time I could simply insert something and seal the envelope, but that doesn't make it 4 years old... lol.SlimShafty said:
You should (try) to read the Manual of Patent Examining Procedure (MPEP) to know how to file a patent [too bad its about 2000 pages], the PTO website will refer to this book frequently. Also, 37 CFR and 35 USC will also help. -> but keep in mind this will eventually cost you in upwards of $100,000 if you try to get patents across the globe.SlimShafty said:
Good luck!
-td
Last edited: