Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
This is exactly what the long discussion with the Judge consisted of. Her opinion is that this one was quite far from the line. Of course, this is different from hearing the arguments in a case, but in her litigator hat, she said this one would not be worth pursuing - and she did this kind of thing for American Express and TheGap. I once bought an Olloclip lens for the iPhone and an Olcolip lens was sent instead. Amazon apologized profusely and sent the real one. The products appeared identical. THAT was over the line. I didn't ask her about the PhotoClam Cube...
Here you go. US Patent Publication of what looks to be the BH-55. My day job is writing/prosecuting patents at an IP boutique and I'm also a current law studentThis is exactly what the long discussion with the Judge consisted of. Her opinion is that this one was quite far from the line. Of course, this is different from hearing the arguments in a case, but in her litigator hat, she said this one would not be worth pursuing - and she did this kind of thing for American Express and TheGap. I once bought an Olloclip lens for the iPhone and an Olcolip lens was sent instead. Amazon apologized profusely and sent the real one. The products appeared identical. THAT was over the line. I didn't ask her about the PhotoClam Cube...
Part of the discussion includes the intended audience. Most (or all) buyers of an RRS ballhead know who and what they are, and are not going to be confused and purchase the Leofoto thinking that it is the RRS.
So nice to see a legal disclaimer on a post (not sarcasm - it recalls my past work life). Some email chains would end up with thirty pages of legal fine print and four sentences of communication....
Should probably note that this post is just for entertainment purposes and fun and should not be construed as a legal opinion or legal advice.
Should probably note that this post is just for entertainment purposes and fun and should not be construed as a legal opinion or legal advice.
I’m not an attorneyYou missed the most important boiler-plate, namely that, "reading and engaging with this blog does not create an attorney-client relationship!".
What, unauthorized practice of law!I’m not an attorney
I think you underestimate the quality of "knock-off" brands nowadays, at least some of them. I can't see anything wrong with quality, fit or precision of the Leofoto tripod and head I have, and I expect them to last long enough.I still think that it is a matter of "You get what you pay for". I find that the brand products that developed the products seem to last a lifetime. I have Gitzo, Novoflex, and other "high-end" gear for over 25 years and with proper care, have lasted quite well. In the end, the prIce spent all those years ago, for example my Gitzo CF tripods, are cheap in comparison to going through knock-off brands with little quality control and/or customer service.
My $0.02 as well,
Joel
Well, I checked with my local expert (Federal Magistrate Judge and ex-corporate litigator. How's THAT for an Appeal to Authority fallacy!). Her strong opinion is that Leofoto is doing nothing actionable here. (Assuming there is no patent violation, and I searched the patent office database and didn't find one for RRS ballheads. Four pages of panorama patents and tripod feet, but no ballheads.) They would have to make an almost indistinguishable copy that would fool a casual observer. I confess surprise, but I withdraw my objections.