May 8, 2024

Popular Wrench Fights a Chinese Rival

One customer who recently spotted the new Craftsman tool, called the Max Axess wrench, thought it was an obvious knockoff, right down to the try-me packaging. “I saw it and I said, ‘This is a Bionic Wrench,’ ” recalled Dana Craig, a retiree and tool enthusiast in Massachusetts who alerted the maker of the Bionic Wrench. “It’s a very distinctive tool,” he added.

The tools have one significant difference, Mr. Craig noted. The Bionic Wrench is made in the United States. The Max Axess wrench is made in China.

The shift at Sears from a tool invented and manufactured in the United States to a very similar one made offshore has already led to a loss of American jobs and a brewing patent battle.

The story of the Bionic Wrench versus Craftsman, which bills itself as “America’s most trusted tool brand,” also raises questions about how much entrepreneurs and innovators, who rely on the country’s intellectual property laws, can protect themselves. For the little guy, court battles are inevitably time-consuming and costly, no matter the outcome.

Still, the inventor of the Bionic Wrench is determined to fight. He is Dan Brown, an industrial designer in Chicago who came up with the wrench after watching his son try to work on a lawn mower. Mr. Brown says he believes that the Max Axess wrench copies his own and he is planning to file suit against Sears, which declined to answer any questions about the wrenches for this article.

The Bionic Wrench is distinguished by its gripping mechanism, a circle of metal prongs that, inspired by the shutter in a single-lens reflex camera, descend evenly to lock onto almost any nut or bolt.

Since Sears has halted new orders, the Pennsylvania company that makes the Bionic Wrench has had to lay off 31 workers, said Keith Hammer, the project manager at the company, Penn United Technologies. “And that’s not to mention our suppliers,” he added.

Mr. Brown sees a broader issue than just the fate of his wrench. “Our situation is an example of why we’re not getting jobs out of innovation,” he said. “When people get the innovation, they go right offshore. What happened to me is what happened to so many people so many times, and we just don’t talk about it.”

Inventors typically spend $10,000 to $50,000 to obtain the type of patent Mr. Brown has on the wrench, said John S. Pratt, a patent expert at Kilpatrick Townsend Stockton in Atlanta. Though he said he could not comment on the merits of Mr. Brown’s potential suit, patent infringement cases can be especially difficult in the tool field, where many improvements are incremental, Mr. Pratt explained.

A defendant in such a case would most likely argue that either the tool did not warrant a patent in the first place, or that its own product did not violate the patent.

The fact that Sears made some changes to the wrench’s design, like making the grooves that allow the metal prongs to slide back and forth visible instead of hidden, will make the case more challenging, he said. “It’s hard for me to imagine that Sears isn’t particularly careful about breach of patent, so there’s probably another side to the story,” he said.

After patenting the wrench in 2005, Mr. Brown formed a company, LoggerHead Tools, to bring it to market, making a point of having it made in the United States.

The Bionic Wrench was greeted with enthusiasm at trade shows and in industrial design competitions, and the company survived the downturn in 2008. Mr. Brown resisted overtures from large chain stores that wanted to sell the tool under their proprietary brand, he said, and rejected the lure of cheaper manufacturing in China. “I was raised a different way,” he said.

The tool sold fairly well on its own — LoggerHead has shipped 1.75 million of them — but Mr. Brown, 56, who teaches industrial design at Northwestern University, says LoggerHead operated on a shoestring and he plowed much of the profit back into the company. “You cannot have big offices and fancy cars and everybody with an administrative assistant, because we are competing with China,” he said.

Article source: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/09/business/popular-wrench-fights-a-chinese-rival.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

Samsung to Seek Block on iPhone in Europe

SEOUL — Samsung Electronics said Wednesday that it would seek to block the sale of the iPhone 4S in France and Italy, claiming that Apple’s newly unveiled smartphone violated its patents.

In seeking a court injunction against its rival in two major European markets, Samsung, of South Korea, was getting more aggressive in its ever-expanding patent battle with Apple. Samsung said each of its injunction requests would cite two patent infringements related to wireless telecommunications technology, specifically the so-called Wideband Code Division Multiple Access standards for mobile handsets.

Samsung planned to file for preliminary injunctions in other countries after further review, the company said without elaborating.

“The infringed technology is essential to the reliable functioning of telecom networks and devices,” Samsung said in a statement. “Apple has continued to flagrantly violate our intellectual property rights and free ride on our technology, and we will steadfastly protect our intellectual property.”

Comment from Apple, which is based in California, was not immediately available.

The two electronics giants are locked in about 20 legal disputes over patents in nine countries, including Australia, Britain, Germany, Japan, the Netherlands and the United States.

The fight began when Apple sued Samsung in April in the United States, alleging that the Samsung Galaxy lineup of smartphones and tablet devices “slavishly” copied the iPhone and iPad in design, user interface and packaging. Samsung has responded with its own lawsuits accusing Apple of violating its intellectual property.

In recent weeks, Samsung officials have said they will become bolder in their fight with Apple, though the U.S. company is one of the top customers for Samsung components.

Samsung’s action came after Apple’s legal actions hurt the South Korean company’s sales. Last month, a German court ruled that Samsung could not sell its new Galaxy Tab 10.1 tablet directly in Germany, Europe’s largest market, saying the design too closely resembled that of the Apple iPad 2.

On Tuesday, Apple turned down an offer from Samsung to settle their patent dispute in Australia, which has kept the Galaxy Tab 10.1 off store shelves in that country.

Separately, a court in the Netherlands barred Samsung from selling three smartphones that rival the iPhone. Samsung is appealing the decisions.

Apple and Samsung are not only competitors in the fast-growing global market for smartphones and tablet computers; they also have a close buyer-supplier relationship. Samsung, the world’s biggest maker of memory chips and flat-panel screens, supplies some of the important components in Apple products.

“We have kept our business relationship in mind, but we have had enough,” a Samsung official said, while explaining the company’s motive, on condition of anonymity. “We think it’s time to act more aggressively.”

Lee Soon-hak, an analyst at Mirae Asset Securities in Seoul, said that by initiating legal action in France and Italy, Samsung had done its homework on where it had the best chance of winning a case against Apple with a significant market effect on its rival.

But he said that the two giants might be seeking a deal to settle their dispute. “I don’t think Apple wants to prolong this battle forever,” he said. “At the same time, Samsung will also want a compromise.”

In June, the Finnish cellphone maker Nokia settled a two-year global patent fight with Apple over smartphone technology through a licensing agreement that will commit Apple to make a one-time payment to Nokia and pay regular royalties in the future.

Samsung’s action came on the same day that Asian smartphone makers were encouraged by the new iPhone 4S, which failed to whip up as much market enthusiasm as its predecessors. Shares of Samsung Electronics, HTC and LG Electronics, all of which make phones using the Google Android operating system, jumped Wednesday.

Samsung was ranked No. 2 globally in smartphones, behind Apple, in the second quarter of this year. In overall mobile phone sales, Samsung ranks second behind Nokia.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=852e99989c7dbbf9af4093d93ca879f9