- Joined
- Mar 29, 2009
- Messages
- 707
- Reaction score
- 35
Hey guys
Appreciate the time and effort on you all going through this and sharing your thoughts. Always helpful to hear different perspectives. @makedansure @Mark6pro @KidMoe .
Well, this whole boxing project thing is not something I yet make margin profit of, it is not what I feed my family or live from. It basically pays off the expenses as of now, but eBay have been one of the main selling channels. Anyway, my eBay account isn't that big deal, may have about 30~ transactions along 2 years ago that I created it. Which still, I wouldn't like to loose.
In other words, I mainly do this because I love boxing, having my room full of different boxing gear and raising these Mexican brands to the outside world of Mexico.
My worry on this topic is more on trying to understand if I'm really going against their patent - which I wouldn't like doing - or they may just be trying to apply their power. I'm not offering replicas or fake Grant gloves, what I'm offering is other Mexican workshop brands with variated colors designs, where some have the 3 stripes.
Appreciate Grant gloves patent may include specific requirements on the whole making of glove and not only its triple colors design. What doesn't make sense to me, is that other Mexican gloves made by other workshops as they've always been done in their own style, should not be allowed to produce/ commercialize triple stripe thumb/ cuff colors design.
Thanks,
Edgar
Not a lawyer so take the following with a grain of salt. It doesn't add up that there is a patent on an aesthetic feature like a triple stripe thumb. Patents are supposed to be useful and novel. From Wikipedia on US patent law.
These guidelines assert that a process, including a process for doing business, must produce a concrete, useful and tangible result to be patentable. It does not matter whether the process is within the traditional technological arts or not.
Here's another link on patentability. Now, if it's a trademark, that makes more sense as to the type of IP.
The infringement should be accurately described in these kind of communications. Sounds like BS.