Author: Chuck
Date: 18:03:46 11/18/05
Go up one level in this thread
On November 18, 2005 at 12:38:02, Ruud Martin wrote: >Meaning : That i am happy there is no info, seems taht the modular concept is >not protected :) > >Ruud > > >On November 18, 2005 at 12:32:11, Ruud Martin wrote: > >>Read it, and there is no info regarding the modular concept.... >> >>Greetings to Chuck and Steve Hi Ruud, Although I am not a lawyer, my understanding leads me to suggest that your approach with Saitek might begin by looking for a deal on positive terms (starting out on the "wrong foot" is not a good sign). But it seems the ball is in your court, if they don't want to give you a satisfactory deal, then you could continue to produce and distribute these devices on your own. You might want to talk to a patent/copyright lawyer before you meet with Saitek. I strongly suggest that even though it might cost. You certainly want to know what the local laws are where you live. Lastly, I think there are a number of cases, especially in the tech field where companies have taken each other to court because one companies' device interfaced to the others' product. But as far as I recall, the outcome has geneally been that this is fair business practice - to create a device that interfaces and "extends" the functionality of another companies devices, like a caller ID box for a telephone. This is a key point. Saitek might have applied in Hong Kong or for that matter, Mephisto in Europe. I don't understand why they wouldn't because this costs nothing to protect your interest, and you should consider doing it as well. Make More! Regards, Chuck
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.