Hey friend. You’re bordering on uncivil here - and that’s not really cool.
As for what @dwarflemur is “rambling” about - you could try scrolling up a little bit in the thread you’re commenting on. There are credible accounts of Glorious requesting a manufacturer to produce another company’s design for them.
I’m all for Drop having competition - they certainly aren’t my favorite and have their fair share of bad karma in this community - but interpreting criticism of Glorious as defending Drop is a strange deflection.
We assigned Massdrop the patent rights in exchange for a royalty and a “license-back” that we believe allows us to source the switches for use in keyboards. But when we tried to order switches for the WhiteFox/NightFox, Massdrop would not let us source them. They then claimed to own the “Halo” name and asked us to give up the license-back altogether, so we would essentially lose all access to our own invention.
So just to be clear, you just went from “there’s nothing wrong with it since it’s hard to prove this is illegal without a patent and expensive lawyers” to “patents are irrelevant”?
I was giving a realistic scenario where people make IP claims all the time and it never stands. My stance never changed. Patents hold their merit, but without them, you are basically grasping at straws.
Capitalism is not an excuse for unethical business practices. I am voting with my wallet and opting to not support this product. Making a competitive product in a free market is one thing. Using shady means to try and steal others product with clones is a whole other issue all together.
Honestly this is very great and engaging conversation on how IP, switches, and related matter are viewed, but I’d like to remind all of you to not let the conversation get out of hand. I understand you all have points of contentions which you feel strongly about which is great. I just ask you all give each other the same respect you would want to receive from one another
Multiple people confirmed that they were irreparably damaged. And IIRC the guy who made the GSUS switches got new molds from them which ended up being near identical anyway.
And then months later Drop claimed to have the original molds. And now Glorious claim the same thing. I wouldn’t be surprised if Invyr just made new molds for both companies and told them they were the originals.
If they are granted the trademark (which is now a first-to-file judgment, no longer a first-to-use judgment) they can legally enforce it against anybody else trying to sell a product by that name.
EDIT: to be clear, just because they’ve filed (and just because they have filed first) does not mean they will be granted the trademark. Just trying to point out that the USPTO made this change years ago and it means they aren’t necessarily going to be stopped just because the term was already in use in the specific field they’re filing under.
Well, if Invyr or Drop failed to patent or trademark Holy Pandas I can’t really blame Glorious for taking a shot at it. Still feel like Glorious is operating very shadily & won’t be buying anything from them, but on the other hand what corporate entity doesn’t act that way. I mean the de facto corporate culture nowadays is where “doing the right thing” depends on if it is cheaper than the fines for doing whatever they want.
