287
« on: April 08, 2019, 0950 UTC »
While I think that the situation may be exactly as described in the article, there isn’t enough information to tell whether C. Crane’s rights were violated.
The author writes as if someone in C. Crane explained their side of the story, but what we still don’t know is:
1. Exactly what contractural agreement did the two companies have regarding intellectual property? Who retained ownership? Paying for the development of something does not necessarily mean you own the design.
2. Did C. Crane pay for all of the R&D, or was it a shared expense?
3. Was the design new from the ground up, or was it based on a refinement of an earlier design? Who owned that?
4. Maybe they had an agreement that the knockoff would not be sold in the US, and the problem here is Amazon?
I’ve often wondered why someone who was seemingly burned once (e.g. the Crane Skywave SSB vs the XHData D-808) would go back to the same place again. You would think they would be wiser the second time around, but maybe there is more to the story.
Show Posts
