Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 61
Like Tree83Likes

Thread: Hana Modz awarded US$300,000 for copyright infringement

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    4,055

    Hana Modz awarded US$300,000 for copyright infringement

    http://www.tasteyourjuice.com/wordpr...apes-Order.pdf

    Plaintiff, Hana Modz, LLC, “developed and sells one of the leading advanced
    electronic cigarette product lines on the market.” (Complaint 2, ECF No. 1; Mot. for
    Default J. 1, ECF No. 8.) Plaintiff has been using the trademark and logo “HANA
    MODZ” since at least April 1, 2013 to market and sell electronic cigarette products.
    (Complaint 3, Ex. B, C, ECF No. 1.) Plaintiff also owns U.S. Trademark Registration
    4620234, which issued after the Complaint was filed. Plaintiff is the owner of
    registered copyrights for photographs of the Hana Modz products, effective April 22,
    - 1 - 14.

    CONCLUSION
    For the reasons stated above, the Court:
    (1) GRANTS Plaintiff’s motion for default judgment.
    (2) GRANTS Plaintiff’s requestfor a permanent injunction. Defendant and each
    of its agents, servants, employees, attorneys, and those persons in active concert or
    participation with any of them are HEREBY ENJOINED from:
    (a) using the HANA MODZ mark, or any colorable imitation thereof or
    confusingly similar term, in the electronic cigarette market, without
    authorization from Plaintiff;
    (b) using the Hana Modz logo, or any colorable imitation thereof or
    confusingly similar logo, in the electronic cigarette market, without
    authorization from Plaintiff;
    (c) advertising, marketing, promoting, selling, distributing, or otherwise
    commercially using the designation “clone,” “1:1 clone,” “copy,” or
    similar phrase in connection with the use of the HANA MODZ mark,
    Hana Modz logo, and Hana Modz copyrighted content.
    (3) GRANTS Plaintiff’s request for statutory fees in the amount of $300,000.
    (4) GRANTS Plaintiff’s request for $7,974 in costs and attorney’s fees.
    IT IS SO ORDERED.

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    4,055
    Feel free to discuss.

    I have heard of one specific case of a certain US modder is not really happy with a QLD AVF vendor selling his clone.
    I wonder whether the modders will end up making more money going after clone vendors instead of making new products?
    bk_renesis, Jas and akef38 like this.

  3. #3
    AVF Regular
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    SW VIC near Hamilton
    Posts
    3,811
    I am curious to know whether counterfeit products are legal within Australia? Are there any AVF members that could give an informed answer. The forum seems to be very responsible in regards to the sale of nicotine, or should I say the non-sale of nicotine, but when it comes to the sale of counterfeit goods there seems to be a wall of silence. What are the legal ramifications?
    bk_renesis and Jas like this.
    LIVE AND LET VAPE
    POWER TO THE P.V.
    OFF THE SMOKES FOREVER

  4. #4
    AVF Regular
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Griffith, NSW
    Posts
    3,424
    i dont know time will tell i suppose, i can see this thread derailing into a original vs clones debate.

    i support clones, keeps makers in reality instead of "ill charge a bajillion dollars for my Vape item"
    but i also think the clone company is being a d*ck using the their logo,
    If you gonna clone them fine don't rub their faces in it

    Quote Originally Posted by Gresh11 View Post
    I am curious to know whether counterfeit products are legal within Australia? Are there any AVF members that could give an informed answer. The forum seems to be very responsible in regards to the sale of nicotine, or should I say the non-sale of nicotine, but when it comes to the sale of counterfeit goods there seems to be a wall of silence. What are the legal ramifications?
    rules on avf are 100% clear, selling clone gear needs to be in the title, failure to do so is ban able by the FM ban hammer. as for aussie law you can buy clone phones so i think its more of a buyer beware thing
    Last edited by Hoofprint; 04-03-15 at 04:16 AM.

  5. #5
    Jas
    Jas is offline
    AVF Regular
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Melbz
    Posts
    3,358
    What a fuken joke not being able to sell juice on AVF anymore. Still pisses me right off to this day and i'll never forget it! absolute hypocrites! cant sell juice with nic but can sell counterfeit items
    Its like going to the movies and bringing your recorder in and recording American sniper and than selling it here in the classes on DVD! But i guess its ok because it is labeled *CLONE* Hypocrisy at its finest....
    The Glock 9mm has a historic legacy of reliability, performance, Power and perfection


    Vaping has just become apart of life, It will always be there until the very end.
    Official Vanilla custard extremist and connoisseur.

  6. #6
    AVF Regular
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Perth, WA
    Posts
    443
    I'll second that, I enjoy building guitars in the style of Gibsons, Fenders etc but I wouldn't dream of using their logo on the headstock, or even trying to sell it off as a Strat or Les Paul.
    As long as they make it very clear that it is a 'model x - style' and not 'model x', and the buyer is fully aware that what he is buying is a clone, it keeps the professionals in check.
    Didnt work for the guitar industry, I think if anything it made Gibson/Fender price their products higher to differentiate but hey, it seems to work for the vape community...
    Peace, YNWA
    Benj

    'Some people believe football is a matter of life and death, I am very disappointed with that attitude. I can assure you it is much, much more important than that.' - Bill Shankly




  7. #7
    AVF Regular
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    3,048
    Will be interesting to see where this ends up. Not only if more will get fined but if it will slow down the production or selling of clones.
    bk_renesis likes this.
    supporter of genuine mods and attys


  8. #8
    AVF Regular
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    SW VIC near Hamilton
    Posts
    3,811
    Quote Originally Posted by Gresh11 View Post
    I am curious to know whether counterfeit products are legal within Australia? Are there any AVF members that could give an informed answer. The forum seems to be very responsible in regards to the sale of nicotine, or should I say the non-sale of nicotine, but when it comes to the sale of counterfeit goods there seems to be a wall of silence. What are the legal ramifications?


    Quote Originally Posted by Hoofprint View Post
    i dont know time will tell i suppose, i can see this thread derailing into a original vs clones debate.
    I asked a legitimate question. Intellectual property is supposedly protected within Australia. I am trying to ascertain the legal standpoint not personal opinion.
    Quote Originally Posted by Hoofprint View Post
    i support clones, keeps makers in reality instead of "ill charge a bajillion dollars for my Vape item"
    but i also think the clone company is being a d*ck using the their logo,
    If you gonna clone them fine don't rub their faces in it
    Your personal opinions contradict the legal ownership of a product as far as I can tell as a laymen. Intellectual property (IP) is the product of a creator's mind, such as an invention, design, logo, or an original literary, musical, dramatic or artistic work, process and even breed of plant.
    Quote Originally Posted by Hoofprint View Post
    rules on avf are 100% clear, selling clone gear needs to be in the title, failure to do so is ban able by the FM ban hammer. as for aussie law you can buy clone phones so i think its more of a buyer beware thing
    The rules might be 100% clear but that doesn't necessarily make them 100% legal Hoofy.
    bk_renesis likes this.
    LIVE AND LET VAPE
    POWER TO THE P.V.
    OFF THE SMOKES FOREVER

  9. #9
    AVF Regular
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    1,830
    Quote Originally Posted by ssstahly View Post
    Will be interesting to see where this ends up. Not only if more will get fined but if it will slow down the production or selling of clones.
    The unfortunate reality of it is that while it may stop US based stores stocking the offending products it will do little to stop the Chinese companies and websites producing or selling them. Unless a ruling within China or against a large manufacturer like tobbeco or Hcigar happens they'll keep making them. US customs will not be able to search each individual package to ascertain whether it contains clones or not, bulk shipments yes but not individual packages.

    Now from what I read in the OP and I'll state categorically I'm NOT a lawyer the offence was selling a product that used Hana modz copyrighted logo not the actual physical product itself. So in the future if the manufactures don't use the logos of these companies and don't use the term clone or 1:1 clone then they don't fall fowl of this ruling.

  10. #10
    AVF Regular
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    3,048
    Quote Originally Posted by Littleraf View Post
    The unfortunate reality of it is that while it may stop US based stores stocking the offending products it will do little to stop the Chinese companies and websites producing or selling them. Unless a ruling within China or against a large manufacturer like tobbeco or Hcigar happens they'll keep making them. US customs will not be able to search each individual package to ascertain whether it contains clones or not, bulk shipments yes but not individual packages.

    Now from what I read in the OP and I'll state categorically I'm NOT a lawyer the offence was selling a product that used Hana modz copyrighted logo not the actual physical product itself. So in the future if the manufactures don't use the logos of these companies and don't use the term clone or 1:1 clone then they don't fall fowl of this ruling.
    The idea behind clones is that the original is normally tried and tested, it worked and sold and hence the cloners seeing a market for that same product. If they are unable to say what it's a clone of, it will make it very difficult for people to search for it and therefor buy it.




    And for a couple of the other comments above mentioning that clones help keep the modders in check and not charge a bazillion dollars, besides a few like svomestro, I don't think too many set there pricing lower to compete with the upcoming clone of there product.

    Remember, a lot of modders are just backyard guys making this stuff. There not rich. Most set there price to cover there costs and make a little on the side.
    These are the people making and innovating new products.
    bk_renesis likes this.
    supporter of genuine mods and attys


 

 
Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.4
Copyright © 2019 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0
All times are GMT +11. The time now is 03:23 PM.