Is this a better approach to vaporizing e-liquid?
- Thread starter Yozhik
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Lik Hong is employee of Bit tobacco now. What we see here is a patent not devised to make a workable evaporator, but a patent for future patent wars:
http://www.economist.com/blogs/schumpeter/2014/03/e-cigarette-patent-wars
Different pieces were patented here, including pretty obvious ones, and they will be used in future to stop competitors from developing better devices (patented device is, for sure, not workable).
I hate to see patents like this one.
http://www.economist.com/blogs/schumpeter/2014/03/e-cigarette-patent-wars
Different pieces were patented here, including pretty obvious ones, and they will be used in future to stop competitors from developing better devices (patented device is, for sure, not workable).
I hate to see patents like this one.
You're likely misunderstanding the patent application. The only thing that is being claimed here is a new heating system, as shown in the patent claims. All the elements must be present for a device to infringe if these claims are allowed (which isn't a given - the USPTO may cause the applicant to narrow the claims further). Yes, the specification describes prior art, but that's fairly typical when an inventor continues to refine and improve their products. Also, the specification by itself gives no legal rights.
I see lots of wicking issues and dry hits, and a huge pita when the mesh gets caked up with sludge from the evaporating juice.
I still like the idea of nuclear powered glow in the dark heat transmutation.....
Are you sure?
Take a look: Patent US20150034103 - Electronic cigarette - Google Patents
The patent includes 17 (!) claims. Wide field for litigation.
All patents belonging to BT (as this one) are bad for vapers.
The guy's name is Hon Lik, not Lik Hon. And actually he's not the inventor of the concept -- that was an American in 1963 -- Hon Lik was the guy who designed the MODERN e-cigarette. And anything in a closed system is emphatically NOT a good idea.
Andria
Andria
Most patents include up to 20 claims (after that you have to pay higher filing fees for more), but what matters is the independent claims of which there are typically three. All of them are directed to the same thing, as shown by independent claim 1.
Claim 1: An electronic cigarette comprising:
(a) a housing;
(b) liquid storage within the housing;
(c) a mesh element in contact with the liquid storage; and
(d) a heater spaced apart from the mesh element and positioned to heat air which flows through the mesh element.
Claims are comprised of elements, shown here as items (a), (b), (c), and (d). Claim elements individually can refer to the prior art, because such prior art may be necessary to use the invention. However, at least one claim element must be new, which here is the last claim element (d). Should the inventor obtain these claims in a patent, every claim element must be performed by the device for it to infringe. It's not enough that a device does (a) thru (c), it must also do (d).
As to the dependent claims, one only infringes a dependent claim if they also infringe the independent claim. So if dependent claim 2 adds element (e), then a device must perform (a) through (e).
Wheter this is the same guy who is the inventor of the modern ecig as we know it AFAIC I have no problem w/him 'staking out his claims" . 
I do find it super interesting that he is still tweaking new designs. Good for him, in essence, it it saves lives I'm for it.
If anyone else can claim that deed, by all means, they have my respect as well.
Sorry, but I know too many people who have quit using ciga likes and who don't go on forums......and the only important thing is that they are no longer smoking.;
to split hairs (while people are dying of smoking related diseases) about cigalikes versus other designs, and who is marketing what.......sorry, I can't quite cotton to that.
Getting smokers OFF cigs is what I wish for mankind.
I do find it super interesting that he is still tweaking new designs. Good for him, in essence, it it saves lives I'm for it.
If anyone else can claim that deed, by all means, they have my respect as well.
Sorry, but I know too many people who have quit using ciga likes and who don't go on forums......and the only important thing is that they are no longer smoking.;
to split hairs (while people are dying of smoking related diseases) about cigalikes versus other designs, and who is marketing what.......sorry, I can't quite cotton to that.
Getting smokers OFF cigs is what I wish for mankind.
Patent belongs to FONTEM HOLDINGS 1 B.V., NETHERLANDS, which belongs to BT, as well as inventor:Wheter this is the same guy who is the inventor of the modern ecig as we know it AFAIC I have no problem w/him 'staking out his claims" .
In November 2013 Fontem paid $75 million for a portfolio of global e-cigarette patents from Dragonite International, a Hong Kong-based firm. Dragonite's co-founder, Hon Lik, also joined the company.
Yeah, I saw that Economist article a while back.
Keep in mind that Hon Lik's original interest in creating an ecig was because his father died of lung cancer from smoking, and he wanted to get himself and other's off same. That was his rather admirable plan.
Amidst all the power struggles, legal battles, and opionions, I have always tried to keep an eye on the goal of vaping. That is harm reduction and possible cessation of combustible cigs/cigars/tobaccco.........which saves lives.
I'll let other split hairs about who gets the $$, etc.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
