Rip off arbor trolley?

[treequip]

The gloves are off on this one

 

It seems that stein and their manufacturer have indeed had a bit of a fall out

 

DOUBLE LOWERING BOLLARD TREE SURGERY - BE WARNED!!!!!! Read on | eBay

[Ian C]

Yeah hand bags are out over this!

[mendiplogs]

The gloves are off on this one

 

It seems that stein and their manufacturer have indeed had a bit of a fall out

 

DOUBLE LOWERING BOLLARD TREE SURGERY - BE WARNED!!!!!! Read on | eBay

 

Hi tree)Ian there's only one winner in this and this is The lawyers my money on stein that engineering company will be blown out the water thanks Jon

[Ty Korrigan]

Are the Stein products 'patented'...?

Is the name protected?

I think for such small beer there will be no fight worth the money.

There just isn't the money there.

Ty

[Loler UK]

Unfortunately a granted patent isn't worth the paper its written on if it's not worded correctly or was granted in error (ie the design had been in the public domain via youtube video or something stupid before initial filing date), even if it is bombproof it costs allot of money to enforce. I've been lucky enough to work with some of the greatest minds in one of the best patent and trade mark attorney firms in the world, its a tricky old business!

 

It may be the case that the bollards are no longer protected (or not in the UK at least) there is no such thing as an international patent, only a sort of temporary one, at the end of this initial period you must file in all countries where you wish for it to be protected.

 

More concerning to me is the nature of these 'defects' on these rejected items, i cant find any notices on their website etc,

is it possible that previous devices made by the same manufacturer could have the same/ similar defects?

what exactly are the defects we should be looking out for?

how can these devices be differentiated from 'genuine' devices that have had the stickers removed?

 

or in fact is this some other falling out not concerning critical defects at all?

[mendiplogs]

Unfortunately a granted patent isn't worth the paper its written on if it's not worded correctly or was granted in error (ie the design had been in the public domain via youtube video or something stupid before initial filing date), even if it is bombproof it costs allot of money to enforce. I've been lucky enough to work with some of the greatest minds in one of the best patent and trade mark attorney firms in the world, its a tricky old business!

 

It may be the case that the bollards are no longer protected (or not in the UK at least) there is no such thing as an international patent, only a sort of temporary one, at the end of this initial period you must file in all countries where you wish for it to be protected.

 

More concerning to me is the nature of these 'defects' on these rejected items, i cant find any notices on their website etc,

is it possible that previous devices made by the same manufacturer could have the same/ similar defects?

what exactly are the defects we should be looking out for?

how can these devices be differentiated from 'genuine' devices that have had the stickers removed?

 

or in fact is this some other falling out not concerning critical defects at all?

 

HI MATE STEIN has pots of LOOK AT THERE STAND AT APF SHOW MY MONEY ON STEIN them COPY ARB TROLLEYS FILL TO BITS WITH LARGE BUTTS ON THEM :lol:thanks jon