Conid Clone By Penbbs?

[JonSzanto]

Excellent response, Mech. I really was not wanting another "bash Chinese pens for production design methodology" (because there have been so many pointless ones) but wanted to zero in on that actuality of the patent issue. Ink formulas, various type of rubber materials in pen builds, many other topics can all easily withstand opiionation. I happen to think that legal standings and formal procedures like patent application and granting is a more structured and strict set of data, and was wondering if there were really any people who had enough connection to the process that they had solid, cogent information. It should be obvious that the Conid input in the thread is a direct connection to the issue.

Anyway, thanks again for an interesting perspective on the related issues.

[WLSpec]

Does anyone know where one can purchase a PenBBS 355 in clear acrylic? I didn't realize how popular they were, and they seem to be either sold out or unavailable everywhere I look. Can only find colored acrylic ones.

 

Thanks for any answers.

[penzel_washinkton]

I don't think the 355-15SF has been made previously yet, probably in the earlier batches.

CMIIW though.

[Honeybadgers]

  On 6/6/2020 at 6:39 AM, JonSzanto said:

Excellent response, Mech. I really was not wanting another "bash Chinese pens for production design methodology" (because there have been so many pointless ones) but wanted to zero in on that actuality of the patent issue. Ink formulas, various type of rubber materials in pen builds, many other topics can all easily withstand opiionation. I happen to think that legal standings and formal procedures like patent application and granting is a more structured and strict set of data, and was wondering if there were really any people who had enough connection to the process that they had solid, cogent information. It should be obvious that the Conid input in the thread is a direct connection to the issue.

 

Anyway, thanks again for an interesting perspective on the related issues.

 

 

And last thing to consider that even if there was patent infringement, Chinese companies haven't exactly "followed" intellectual property laws for a long time. It's the main basis behind the current trade war

[Honeybadgers]

  On 6/6/2020 at 3:59 AM, JonSzanto said:

Not inherently, no. Also not anywhere as valid as someone who might actually know what they are talking about from experience in that field. Hence my pondering on the opinions so easily given in this subject area.

 

One problem we have is that industry experts are often too timid to actually weight in. A lawyer will never weight in on the situation with much depth because he's worried it may be construed as legal advice. Doctors are far too sheepish for the same reason. So the only people really have actually commenting in general are the autodidacts of the world. And that has actually contributed towards the anti-intellectual bias we suffer from as well. The argument that Wikipedia isn't a good source for information, when experiments showing that editing minor falehoods into obscure pages, found them often corrected in an absurdly short amount of time.

 

And one problem industry professionals have is that they retreat into the world of their profession and become damn near incomprehensible to the layperson (something that we really struggled with during our last quarter biology DNA Methyllation of corn genome expression grown during drought/non drought situations, the jargon really made absorbing the depth of procedures for each lab step far harder than it needed to be, and there was no plain-language example in existence. It was written by industry pros for industry pros. Basically all of our data was absolute trash when it came time to sequence ) So when there's no actual industry vets to weight in, all we have are those who research being placed on equal pedestals to those who spout uneducated tripe out on the internet hiding behind anonymity.

 

A lot of the best educators out there are very good at their thing, but also have learned the rare skill of communication. So they take other fields that they aren't necessarily experts in, but can research with the same degree of skill that they would apply to the thing they are trained in, and share that knowledge in a way that is palatable to the masses. For examples, see Bill Nye or Neil DeGrasse Tyson. Engineer and astrophysicist respectively, but they know how to research and present information that can generally be taken credibly.

 

Again, tying it back to medicine, the field I've been in for a decade and am working towards reaching emergency physician in the next 4-6 years, I see so, so many doctors that just don't know how to interact with their patients. They rattle off stats, figures, complex medical terms and just bewilder and frighten their patients. And everything they say and do is to cover themselves in the possibility of saying something wrong. But the rare few I've seen that have sat down with a patient before they were checked in and given a huge bill for doing so, spent five minutes talking to them in a side room, looking them over, and saying "you know, this doesn't really look like an allergic reaction to me. I'd hate for you to get a huge bill for a false alarm, so why don't you hang out here in the waiting room for 30 minutes and if anything changes, we'll bring you back in and get it taken care of right away. Can I get you a cup of coffee?"

 

I won't name names, but that doctor is my spirit animal. I've also seen him straight up apologize to patients, an industry "no-no" and in his 40 years as an ER doctor, he's never been sued.

Edited June 9, 2020 by Honeybadgers

[penzel_washinkton]

  On 6/5/2020 at 1:01 AM, Waski_the_Squirrel said:

 

My understanding is that this filling mechanism predates both companies. This patent dates from 1898. As you say, patent infringement would require something very specific that Conid has patented.

 

https://patents.google.com/patent/US610818

Hey Waski, hence why I requested the poster claiming copyright infringement on which particular Conid patent PenBBS infringed.

Love your YT vids by the way.

Edited June 9, 2020 by penzel_washinkton

[Karmachanic]

  On 6/9/2020 at 8:25 AM, penzel_washinkton said:

Hey Waski, hence why I requested the poster claiming copyright infringement on which particular Conid patent PenBBS infringed.

 

 

 

That would be the engineer who designed the Conid Bulkfiller system.

 

[JonSzanto]

I received one of the new PenBBS 355 pens today that utilizes the revamped piston engagement mechanism. I works precisely as one would want, and is intuitive to use (it does help that in a semi-demonstrator, you can see what is happening). While I haven't inked it I have no doubt, based on prior 355 performance, that it will fill easily and amply. The build quality and materials remain excellent. All in all, a remarkable pen for what it does and what it sells for.

[JonSzanto]

V2 355 with a Platinum 3776 SF nib installed. You could do worse.

[Lloyd]

  On 6/27/2020 at 1:43 AM, JonSzanto said:

V2 355 with a Platinum 3776 SF nib installed. You could do worse.

 

Did this require a custom feed from Pablo (or other)?

[JonSzanto]

  On 6/27/2020 at 1:59 AM, Lloyd said:

Did this require a custom feed from Pablo (or other)?

No. The feed is very similar in shape to the Plat nib which is why I had considered doing this one day. In a perfect world the nib would be a mm or two longer and/or 0.25% thicker for just a tiny bit snugger fit, but I've had original nib/feed setups that didn't fit this well, so this will be fine. I've only dipped it so far but will take the plunge tonight. I'd also like to try a big honking Sheaffer nib from the 20s, because they have really long tails and that would be a great "endurance-writing" pen setup.

 

Damn, that was a long answer.

[ek-hornbeck]

  On 5/28/2020 at 9:15 AM, fountainbel said:

The improved Penbbs design - integrating the bajonet anchoring of the piston - is clearly a patent infringement on the Conid Bulkfiller patent.

Francis

I think it's weird that everyone is busy explaining to Fountainbel the legal details of the applicability of his patent. But not one comment pointing out that it's sleazy to rip off other people's ideas without compensating them or licensing their IP.

 

I'm not a lawyer, so I have no idea what the legal fine points are. But I don't need to be a lawyer to see that Fountainbel's creativity and innovation have been appropriated.

 

It's pathetic how little innovation there is in the world of fountain pen technology and design. High-end pens are mostly based on century-old designs. Pelikan, for example, is still selling their 1929 piston-filler technology. They dress it up in "limited editions," and slather a lot of marketing bloviation on top, but it's just old wine in new bottles. Pilot's clever retractable-nib tech hasn't changed in almost sixty years. And it shows. The pens leak, have no ink capacity, and dry out because the little trap door doesn't seal that well. They've had sixty years to work on these issues, but they haven't. Just like Pelikan, they just keep peddling the same stuff in new colors of plastic shell, instead of doing the hard work of working on the underlying mechanisms.

 

And Pelikan and Pilot are two reasonably vital companies in the ecosystem today, who make good products. I don't mean to pick on them; they're just convenient examples.

 

Fountainbel's Bulkfiller design is a rare exception to this desert of innovation. Certainly there are precedents to his design, but there always are, and the devil is in the details. And Conid's bulkfiller design is a great idea. It's astounding how much ink it permits a pen to hold. It completely solves the "airplane" problem.

 

But why bother innovating, which is a hassle and takes lots of work, and thought, and risk? Mainland Chinese companies, which are are notorious for violating copyright and infringing on patents, will just come along and blast out inexpensive implementations of your design.

 

I am surprised at how one-sided the comments in this thread have been. Especially since Goosens is not some faceless abstraction. He's an actual, active, contributing member of the FPN community, one of our own. I have seen him make insightful and useful posts here.

 

EKH

[A Smug Dill]

  On 8/7/2020 at 5:42 PM, ek-hornbeck said:

I think it's weird that everyone is busy explaining to Fountainbel the legal details of the applicability of his patent. But not one comment pointing out that it's sleazy to rip off other people's ideas without compensating them or licensing their IP.

Then perhaps you could regard it as indication that the more active and vocal members of the fountain pen hobbyist community don't predominantly or actively subscribe to the particular personal value(s) that prompted your comment. You're expressing a personal value, not a authoritative rule with any standing that others can be reasonably expected to 'respect' or ; and I think it's perfectly fine for you to hold or even feel strongly about what is apparently a minority position.

 

  Quote

But I don't need to be a lawyer to see that Fountainbel's creativity and innovation have been appropriated.

But that wasn't and isn't Fountainbel's express claim, to which others here have responded directly or indirectly in this thread.

Edited August 9, 2020 by A Smug Dill

[steve50]

  On 8/7/2020 at 5:42 PM, ek-hornbeck said:

I think it's weird that everyone is busy explaining to Fountainbel the legal details of the applicability of his patent. But not one comment pointing out that it's sleazy to rip off other people's ideas without compensating them or licensing their IP.

 

I'm not a lawyer, so I have no idea what the legal fine points are. But I don't need to be a lawyer to see that Fountainbel's creativity and innovation have been appropriated.

 

It's pathetic how little innovation there is in the world of fountain pen technology and design. High-end pens are mostly based on century-old designs. Pelikan, for example, is still selling their 1929 piston-filler technology. They dress it up in "limited editions," and slather a lot of marketing bloviation on top, but it's just old wine in new bottles. Pilot's clever retractable-nib tech hasn't changed in almost sixty years. And it shows. The pens leak, have no ink capacity, and dry out because the little trap door doesn't seal that well. They've had sixty years to work on these issues, but they haven't. Just like Pelikan, they just keep peddling the same stuff in new colors of plastic shell, instead of doing the hard work of working on the underlying mechanisms.

 

And Pelikan and Pilot are two reasonably vital companies in the ecosystem today, who make good products. I don't mean to pick on them; they're just convenient examples.

 

Fountainbel's Bulkfiller design is a rare exception to this desert of innovation. Certainly there are precedents to his design, but there always are, and the devil is in the details. And Conid's bulkfiller design is a great idea. It's astounding how much ink it permits a pen to hold. It completely solves the "airplane" problem.

 

But why bother innovating, which is a hassle and takes lots of work, and thought, and risk? Mainland Chinese companies, which are are notorious for violating copyright and infringing on patents, will just come along and blast out inexpensive implementations of your design.

 

I am surprised at how one-sided the comments in this thread have been. Especially since Goosens is not some faceless abstraction. He's an actual, active, contributing member of the FPN community, one of our own. I have seen him make insightful and useful posts here.

 

EKH

 

I fail to see how PenBBS is 'ripping off' Conid's ideas because both companies seem to rely on the original patent that Waski the squirrel posted (https://patents.google.com/patent/US610818). To me this doesn't seem like a mere precedent to Conid's - rather, it's more or less exactly the same. An excerpt from it reads:

 

When the fountain becomes exhausted and it is necessary to refill the same, the cap or plug 2 is unscrewed or otherwise disengaged from the seat in the end of the handle and the stem is drawn through the plunger until the threaded portion thereof is in operative relation with the opening in the plunger, whereupon the rotation of the stem will cause the engagement of its threads with those of the plunger, thus attaching the plunger-stem and enabling the plunger to be reciprocated...

Also, the Japanese were using the double reservoir system with a shut-off valve that solves what you referred to as the airplane problem at least since the 1920s (https://estilofilos.blogspot.com/2010/10/marine.html).

Conid of course deserve credit for reviving the first idea and combining it with the second, but neither is their original invention. In fact, PenBBS has done much more than Conid in bringing all but forgotten filling systems back to life.

I think Conid would have cause for complaint if PenBBS produced an exact copy of Conid pens which is however not at all the case here. It'd be unfair to lump PenBBS together with some other Chinese companies that are blatant copycats.

I don't know why Fountainbel felt he had to post a negative comment. People who buy Conid are not going to be dissuaded because there's a much cheaper substitute, just like people who want a Porsche aren't going to be satisfied with a Mazda.

Edited August 8, 2020 by steve50

[whichwatch]

Jon, I had read somewhere that the inside cap length does not allow use of a Jowo nib as the nib is too long. Do you have any trouble installing the cap over the 3776 nib?

 

 

  On 6/27/2020 at 1:43 AM, JonSzanto said:

V2 355 with a Platinum 3776 SF nib installed. You could do worse.

[Cyclohexene]

I posted this in another thread as a one-off joke, but this thread is a goldmine for crossing off the bingo chart. Just change MB to Covid and here we go.

 

Let's start playing the knock-off/homage bingo:

 

1 2 3 4 5

6 7 8 9 10

11 12 FS 13 14

15 16 17 18 19

20 21 22 23 24

 

1: it's a knock-off

2: it's an homage

3: it's fine because they don't use the MB logo

4: the factory making these probably also make the fake MBs

5: it's making the design more accessible

6: people who can afford real MB won't buy it

7: it cheapens real MB

8: it affects real MB sales

9: there are no copyright laws in China

10: they are not infringing any copyright laws

11: the design is old enough for the protection to expire and it's now public domain

12: I would never give my money to fake sellers

13: I would never spend that much money on a real MB

14: *inflammatory remarks about labour law*

15: "Show me what patent they are infringing. You can't, can you!?"

16: I'm not a lawyer, but...

17: but people like it when they copy the P51

18: the P51 is no longer in production, but the MB is still being produced

19: normal people can't afford the real thing

20: people should save up for the real thing if they really want it

21: every pen copies the first FP in history

22: it makes the market more competitive and benefits consumers

23: it kills innovation and originality

24: *off topic comments that derail the thread*

[peroride]

Bingo!

[ek-hornbeck]

  On 8/8/2020 at 3:25 PM, Cyclohexene said:

I posted this in another thread as a one-off joke, but this thread is a goldmine for crossing off the bingo chart. Just change MB to Covid and here we go.

 

Let's start playing the knock-off/homage bingo:

 

1 2 3 4 5

6 7 8 9 10

11 12 FS 13 14

15 16 17 18 19

20 21 22 23 24

 

[...]

 

Wow, this is terrifically useful. Your coverage is hilariously complete. We can now reduce these conversations about IP to a simple sequence of numbers in the range [1,24]. Plus maybe a single coefficient in the range [0,1] capturing the poster's intended level of grumpiness/crankiness.

 

Thank you.

 

EKH

 

[JonSzanto]

  On 8/8/2020 at 12:50 PM, whichwatch said:

Jon, I had read somewhere that the inside cap length does not allow use of a Jowo nib as the nib is too long. Do you have any trouble installing the cap over the 3776 nib?

 

I found no issue with the 3776 nib. Visually it looked to be *very* close, but in carefully capping it, closer inspection, there was a whisker of room before the tines would touch the inside of the closed end of the cap. However...

 

After a while it just felt like that wasn't the perfect pairing (and probably mostly due to the nib). I wondered if one of my fave of all time type nibs, an early Sheaffer, would work. Indeed, this one, even with a good fit in the collar, is just a bit longer. What to do? It turns out the 'finial', if you will, is threaded into the cap to hold the clip in place, and is a fairly thick piece of acrylic. I sanded off what might have amounted to a mm or two off the inside surface, screwed it all back together and as before, the tips of the tines just barely clear. This is now a perfect writing machine for me, with the possible exception of a really nice material and/or nicer hardware. For function it is all one could want.

 

* * * * *

 

Lastly, if anyone has read my comments over about a 5 year period or so on the topic of intellectual and design theft by many of these pen companies, they would know that much of it has really bothered me, enough to stick my neck out in many discussions. The plain fact of the matter is that... no heed is paid. It continues and my purchasing or not purchasing these pens will not alter their behavior. I find it both sad and disgusting but there is nothing a single person can do about it. I purchased this pen to understand better how close the copying was, and I now have that understanding in my hands.

I'm saving my anger and activism for bigger issues facing the world right now.

 

Here's the last and final iteration:

 

Edited August 9, 2020 by JonSzanto

[A Smug Dill]

  On 8/9/2020 at 6:15 PM, JonSzanto said:

I find it both sad and disgusting but there is nothing a single person can do about it.

Oh, but there is. If Xi Jinping decreed that infringement of intellectual property rights is to stop, then it will be significantly curbed, even if not absolutely and completely stopped. He's a single person alright, but one who is unlike the likes of you and me in power and authority as well as in views and personal values.