請支持 正版 Meffert's 齒輪魔方 ( Oskar Van 發明 ) - Meffert's 香港代理發言 !

katsmom

I am answering many posts here so I know it may be a bit confusing.  I am sorry.  I will try to put in a post number.

I am of two minds on this whole topic. Like many of you, I agree that copies should not be produced or sold.  But like I said, I can't say don't do it or I would be a hypocrite.  What many of you here might not know is that I usually purchase 2 copies of each (if I am not given them-which does happen more often than you think-but this will probably stop now that I have posted this here) One is sent on to the original designer so they can take whatever action they wish.  (especially when someone has seen them for sale on eBay.  They often ask me to purchase one for them-I have easier access, and they don't pay crazy shipping prices)  The other sits on my shelf.  Most of the time, I am not paid anything for those copies I purchase.  I can't even begin to count how many copies I've sent on.  
@#88, and #98: I agree that items should be priced according to the local market.  That's why I go to Shenzhen to buy my chewing gum.  It's half the cost of Hong Kong.  If a product like this is copied for the domestic market, and the domestic market alone, I would almost go so far as to say make it. But DON'T ship it internationally.  But then that raises the problem of not having puzzles from other countries.  I was alive during the initial cube phase and it took me around 4 or 5 years to get a genuine Rubik's cube.  My first-well, they were copies because that was all that was available.  I realize that not everyone can afford Meffert's prices-I have a hard time keeping up with all he is producing.  But as I've said on TP, puzzles are not necessities.  We don't NEED them.  We WANT them.  There is a difference.  For me, as long as the copy companies keep producing patented puzzles, the less designers are going to want to make puzzles.  None of us want to go through the 'drought' of the '90's again.  


@#92: SmaZ, I totally understand your point. I agree with it as well.  I've argued it until I have turned 'blue in the face' (I don't know if that will translate-maybe with 'wasted breath') He believes what he is doing helps in some way.  If Meffert's was the only company selling them, then he might be able to stop it.  As it stands, he's not, and all he is doing is giving a small bit to the original designers.  'Giving a bit back' if you will.  (I can't argue something I don't believe in.  Can't even play devil's advocate very well)


@#96: Is Meffert being arrogant by challenging the companies that are copying his patented designs?  I think not.  It is what any of you would do.  (providing you have the money)  You will notice he (via the words of calvin_cube on this forum) is not 'fighting' the copy of the skewb or pyraminx or any of the puzzles he produced in the '80's and early '90's.  He is only 'fighting' the new patents that he has produced.  He is trying to protect his investment.  Something any business man would do.  


And yes, my collection of toys is huge.    But I work hard to make it so. I search auction sites all over the world to get those toys that I want.  I have learned to 'read' auctions for Rubik's cubes in about 20 languages now so i can see if it is something I want.  Sometimes I make an impulse buy and get a treasure.  Other times I end up getting scammed by the seller and end up with a copy I could have purchased here for half the cost. But you must also remember, I have been collecting these toys since the early '80's.  Not all of them are recent purchases.  I have many custom puzzles, and many many more old puzzles.  


For the record, in response to #82, I post here as myself.  Not an affiliate of twisty puzzles.  My views may not be the same as the other moderators or the forum owner.  On that forum we have simply banned any links to the purchase of copy puzzles.  Please do not think I post for Twisty Puzzles!  I DO NOT!


I will also add that I have never said "don't buy copies because I wouldn't"  If people ask me, I tell them the truth.  I don't hide my replies either.  It's better to be up front about it.  


@#89: BOY is blue orange yellow-yes.  Sorry, I assumed all called it the same pattern.  According to copyright laws that means any black body cube with the BOY pattern is illegal.  Yes, I know you are all going to scream now.  I am only answering what I learned from a law professor in HK.  I asked this question after a big discussion on TP around a year ago.  But is Ideal toys (who owns that copyright) going to take all companies to court over it?  I doubt it.  (my opinion only)


I am upset that many companies can produce really cool puzzles-the puffy heart, the potato (yes witeden, I know you call it an egg, but it looks more like a potato to me), the star I just got, that really neat new electronic cube-but they still copy patented puzzles.  There are just soooooo many out of patent puzzles that could be made: Rubik's maze, the clock (done!), the cheese (UFO mechanism, so still a copy), the dino star, the trik haus, the combo, rubik's missing link, just to name a few.  Why not just go get an old patent that has expired and make those???


@#99:  I don't know what Q is. I am sorry.  


At the end of the day, there is no answer for this problem.  It is up to us to do what we believe to be right.  I sleep at night when I buy a copy knowing that I've sent one on to the guy who made it in the first place.  Even when I keep a copy for myself .  I'm a collector.  that's what collectors do.  We get everything we can get our hands on.


again, sorry for the English.  @#91, what is tutu? A translation program?  can I have a link.  I feel very bad posting in English here.  If I can get a good translation program, I will post in Chinese.

snowchou

原帖由 星星闪 于 2010-10-13 22:04 发表 正版和盗版的消费群不一样，他们相交的部份不是想象的那么多。我个人觉得很多人看到新奇的魔方，并不是很想拥有的，只有在价格合适的情况下才可能买来玩一下。如果觉得价高，就根本不会去买。没有盗版，他们也不会 ...

我努力想了想，感觉交集确实不大。
^_^

野 子

http://bbs.mf8-china.com/viewthread.php?tid=63264  Please see this post 101 F

刘超

101#大师就是大师。我很赞同

snowchou

原帖由 katsmom 于 2010-10-13 22:12 发表 I am answering many posts here so I know it may be a bit confusing.  I am sorry.  I will try to put in a post number. I am of two minds on this whole topic. Like many of you, I agree that copies s ...

首先要感谢Rox抽出这么多时间来回帖，听听这位收藏家的意见，相信对魔友们有很大帮助。（TP上关于正版盗版的争论比魔方吧要早要持久，窃以为也更有深度）

具体的感谢，说下面这两条吧：
1. Rubik's的霸道
@#89: BOY is blue orange yellow-yes.  Sorry, I assumed all called it the same pattern.  According to copyright laws that means any black body cube with the BOY pattern is illegal.  Yes, I know you are all going to scream now.  I am only answering what I learned from a law professor in HK.  I asked this question after a big discussion on TP around a year ago.  But is Ideal toys (who owns that copyright) going to take all companies to court over it?  I doubt it.  (my opinion only)
理解无误的话，凡是 ”黑底BOY配色（也就是我们所谓的标准配色）的魔方都是illegal非法的“，是否也可以说是盗版？
Rubik's（或者确切说ideal公司）这一做法饱受争议，但他却受法律保护。（Seven Towns公司称：魔方在全世界获得了超过60个持续的受保护权利，不仅是魔方本身，连它在电视、电影和广告中的形象使用权也一并受保护）
很想知道这个保护是否有时限，到什么时间为止？


2. 过期专利魔方的生产
I am upset that many companies can produce really cool puzzles-the puffy heart, the potato (yes witeden, I know you call it an egg, but it looks more like a potato to me), the star I just got, that really neat new electronic cube-but they still copy patented puzzles.  There are just soooooo many out of patent puzzles that could be made: Rubik's maze, the clock (done!), the cheese (UFO mechanism, so still a copy), the dino star, the trik haus, the combo, rubik's missing link, just to name a few.  Why not just go get an old patent that has expired and make those???
有很多魔方的已过了专利保护时效，国内的厂家可以跟进了，请尽情大展拳脚吧。

chris

For the BOY color scheme, I believe it's trademark, not copyright, that's the issue. Same result, just nomenclature.
And not a big deal. EastSheen does just fine. And bundling the stickers separate like so many of the companies already do probably makes it a nonissue.
There're plenty of options available, which is why it bothers me when people complain about a single one that's difficult.

回 105

关于trademark保护时限，这个比专利更复杂。还在用的话，好像trademark可以直接保护下去。但是trademark没有专利那么强，看东贤的，把橙色改成紫色就没问题。
注意我才一而略知，不之专家，这就是我关于这个问题听说过的。

[ 本帖最后由 chris 于 2010-10-13 22:47 编辑 ]

snowchou

原帖由 chris 于 2010-10-13 22:39 发表 For the BOY color scheme, I believe it's trademark, not copyright, that's the issue. Same result, just nomenclature. And not a big deal. EastSheen does just fine. And bundling the stickers separate  ...

哦，原来是注册商标。以前听过，可惜又给忘记了。
东贤的紫色就是因为这个？

katsmom

#105 part 2.  I completely agree with you!
Part 1:  MY UNDERSTANDING (as told by that law professor) is that yes, all black 3x3x3 cubes that have the BOY color scheme are illegal.  But in reality, is Ideal (7Towns as you say) going to fight it?  As I understand, (and I may be wrong) the copyright lasts for the lifetime of the holder of the copyright.  My understanding is that this can be held by a company, and as long as the company exists, the copyright exists.  If it is a person, the child can have it but only for a short time after the person dies (maybe 20 years??) I am not a lawyer.  I wish I knew more....

katsmom

Thank you for the clarification chris.  It has been so long ago, I forget.  too much new information in such a small brain, I can't keep it all straight.  

r_517

Seventowns own the trademark of Rubik's brand, but most of the Rubik's copyrights were expired, which means the mechanisms can be copied, but the brand's name "Rubik's" is still under protection.